IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0007522.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing Artificial Neural Networks, General Linear Models and Support Vector Machines in Building Predictive Models for Small Interfering RNAs

Author

Listed:
  • Kyle A McQuisten
  • Andrew S Peek

Abstract

Background: Exogenous short interfering RNAs (siRNAs) induce a gene knockdown effect in cells by interacting with naturally occurring RNA processing machinery. However not all siRNAs induce this effect equally. Several heterogeneous kinds of machine learning techniques and feature sets have been applied to modeling siRNAs and their abilities to induce knockdown. There is some growing agreement to which techniques produce maximally predictive models and yet there is little consensus for methods to compare among predictive models. Also, there are few comparative studies that address what the effect of choosing learning technique, feature set or cross validation approach has on finding and discriminating among predictive models. Principal Findings: Three learning techniques were used to develop predictive models for effective siRNA sequences including Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs), General Linear Models (GLMs) and Support Vector Machines (SVMs). Five feature mapping methods were also used to generate models of siRNA activities. The 2 factors of learning technique and feature mapping were evaluated by complete 3×5 factorial ANOVA. Overall, both learning techniques and feature mapping contributed significantly to the observed variance in predictive models, but to differing degrees for precision and accuracy as well as across different kinds and levels of model cross-validation. Conclusions: The methods presented here provide a robust statistical framework to compare among models developed under distinct learning techniques and feature sets for siRNAs. Further comparisons among current or future modeling approaches should apply these or other suitable statistically equivalent methods to critically evaluate the performance of proposed models. ANN and GLM techniques tend to be more sensitive to the inclusion of noisy features, but the SVM technique is more robust under large numbers of features for measures of model precision and accuracy. Features found to result in maximally predictive models are not consistent across learning techniques, suggesting care should be taken in the interpretation of feature relevance. In the models developed here, there are statistically differentiable combinations of learning techniques and feature mapping methods where the SVM technique under a specific combination of features significantly outperforms all the best combinations of features within the ANN and GLM techniques.

Suggested Citation

  • Kyle A McQuisten & Andrew S Peek, 2009. "Comparing Artificial Neural Networks, General Linear Models and Support Vector Machines in Building Predictive Models for Small Interfering RNAs," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(10), pages 1-14, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0007522
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0007522
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0007522
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0007522&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0007522?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew Fire & SiQun Xu & Mary K. Montgomery & Steven A. Kostas & Samuel E. Driver & Craig C. Mello, 1998. "Potent and specific genetic interference by double-stranded RNA in Caenorhabditis elegans," Nature, Nature, vol. 391(6669), pages 806-811, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Petersen, Alexander M. & Rotolo, Daniele & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2016. "A triple helix model of medical innovation: Supply, demand, and technological capabilities in terms of Medical Subject Headings," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 666-681.
    2. Mark G Sterken & L Basten Snoek & Kobus J Bosman & Jikke Daamen & Joost A G Riksen & Jaap Bakker & Gorben P Pijlman & Jan E Kammenga, 2014. "A Heritable Antiviral RNAi Response Limits Orsay Virus Infection in Caenorhabditis elegans N2," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(2), pages 1-8, February.
    3. Gersbach, Hans & Sorger, Gerhard & Amon, Christian, 2018. "Hierarchical growth: Basic and applied research," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 434-459.
    4. Aflaq Hamid & Sahar Saleem, 2022. "Role of nanoparticles in management of plant pathogens and scope in plant transgenics for imparting disease resistance," Plant Protection Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 58(3), pages 173-184.
    5. Loet Leydesdorff & Lutz Bornmann, 2012. "Mapping (USPTO) patent data using overlays to Google Maps," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(7), pages 1442-1458, July.
    6. Shew, Aaron M. & Danforth, Diana M. & Nalley, Lawton L. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. Jr. & Tsiboe, Francis & Dixon, Bruce L., 2016. "Consumers’ Willingness-To-Pay for RNAi versus Bt Rice: Are all biotechnologies the same?," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235110, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Ian F. Price & Jillian A. Wagner & Benjamin Pastore & Hannah L. Hertz & Wen Tang, 2023. "C. elegans germ granules sculpt both germline and somatic RNAome," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-17, December.
    8. Joseph Nsengimana & Lander Bauters & Annelies Haegeman & Godelieve Gheysen, 2013. "Silencing of Mg - pat-10 and Mg - unc-87 in the Plant Parasitic Nematode Meloidogyne graminicola Using siRNAs," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-12, September.
    9. Loet Leydesdorff & Daniele Rotolo & Ismael Rafols, 2012. "Bibliometric perspectives on medical innovation using the medical subject Headings of PubMed," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(11), pages 2239-2253, November.
    10. Arnaud Segers & Joachim Carpentier & Frédéric Francis & Rudy Caparros Megido, 2023. "Gene Silencing of laccase 1 Induced by Double-Stranded RNA in Callosobruchus maculatus (Fabricius 1775) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) Suggests RNAi as a Potential New Biotechnological Tool for Bruchid’s," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-19, February.
    11. Wei-Jie Pan & Chi-Wei Chen & Yen-Wei Chu, 2011. "siPRED: Predicting siRNA Efficacy Using Various Characteristic Methods," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(11), pages 1-7, November.
    12. Zahra Narimani & Hamid Beigy & Ashar Ahmad & Ali Masoudi-Nejad & Holger Fröhlich, 2017. "Expectation propagation for large scale Bayesian inference of non-linear molecular networks from perturbation data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, February.
    13. Daniele Rotolo & Ismael Rafols & Michael Hopkins & Loet Leydesdorff, 2014. "Scientometric Mapping as a Strategic Intelligence Tool for the Governance of Emerging Technologies," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-10, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    14. Brian Hauge & Christopher Oggero & Nicole Nguyen & Changlin Fu & Fenggao Dong, 2009. "Single Tube, High Throughput Cloning of Inverted Repeat Constructs for Double-Stranded RNA Expression," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(9), pages 1-7, September.
    15. Chai, Sen & Menon, Anoop, 2019. "Breakthrough recognition: Bias against novelty and competition for attention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 733-747.
    16. Ke, Qing, 2020. "The citation disadvantage of clinical research," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1).
    17. Miaowei Mao & Yajie Qian & Wenyao Zhang & Siyu Zhou & Zefeng Wang & Xianjun Chen & Yi Yang, 2023. "Controlling protein stability with SULI, a highly sensitive tag for stabilization upon light induction," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, December.
    18. Li-Xin Ma & Rong-Tao He & Shu-Yan Yan & Wen-Jia Yang, 2022. "RNAi Suppression of Hormone Receptor HR3 Blocks Larval Molting and Metamorphosis in the Cigarette Beetle, Lasioderma serricorne," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-10, August.
    19. Sen Chai, 2017. "Near Misses in the Breakthrough Discovery Process," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 411-428, June.
    20. Takasaki, Shigeru & Kawamura, Yoshihoro, 2007. "Using radial basis function networks and significance testing to select effective siRNA sequences," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(12), pages 6476-6487, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0007522. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.