Evaluating network-based missing protein prediction using p-values, Bayes Factors, and probabilities

Some prediction methods use probability to rank their predictions, while some other prediction methods do not rank their predictions and instead use [Formula: see text]-values to support their predictions. This disparity renders direct cross-comparison of these two kinds of methods difficult. In par...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Goh, Wilson Wen Bin, Kong, Weijia, Wong, Limsoon
Other Authors: School of Biological Sciences
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: 2023
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10356/169216
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Nanyang Technological University
Language: English
id sg-ntu-dr.10356-169216
record_format dspace
spelling sg-ntu-dr.10356-1692162023-07-07T08:17:53Z Evaluating network-based missing protein prediction using p-values, Bayes Factors, and probabilities Goh, Wilson Wen Bin Kong, Weijia Wong, Limsoon School of Biological Sciences Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine (LKCMedicine) Center for Biomedical Informatics Science::Biological sciences Machine Learning Missing Proteins Some prediction methods use probability to rank their predictions, while some other prediction methods do not rank their predictions and instead use [Formula: see text]-values to support their predictions. This disparity renders direct cross-comparison of these two kinds of methods difficult. In particular, approaches such as the Bayes Factor upper Bound (BFB) for [Formula: see text]-value conversion may not make correct assumptions for this kind of cross-comparisons. Here, using a well-established case study on renal cancer proteomics and in the context of missing protein prediction, we demonstrate how to compare these two kinds of prediction methods using two different strategies. The first strategy is based on false discovery rate (FDR) estimation, which does not make the same naïve assumptions as BFB conversions. The second strategy is a powerful approach which we colloquially call "home ground testing". Both strategies perform better than BFB conversions. Thus, we recommend comparing prediction methods by standardization to a common performance benchmark such as a global FDR. And where this is not possible, we recommend reciprocal "home ground testing". Ministry of Education (MOE) WWBG and LW gratefully acknowledge support from a Singapore Ministry of Education Academic Research Fund Tier 2 grant (Grant No. MOE2019-T2-1-042).WWBG also gratefully acknowledges support from a Singapore Ministry of Education Academic Research Fund Tier 1 grant (Grant No. RS08/21 RG35/20). 2023-07-07T08:17:53Z 2023-07-07T08:17:53Z 2023 Journal Article Goh, W. W. B., Kong, W. & Wong, L. (2023). Evaluating network-based missing protein prediction using p-values, Bayes Factors, and probabilities. Journal of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, 21(1), 2350005-. https://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S0219720023500051 0219-7200 https://hdl.handle.net/10356/169216 10.1142/S0219720023500051 36891972 2-s2.0-85150720652 1 21 2350005 en MOE2019-T2-1-042 RS08/21 RG35/20 Journal of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology © 2023 World Scientific Publishing Europe Ltd. All rights reserved.
institution Nanyang Technological University
building NTU Library
continent Asia
country Singapore
Singapore
content_provider NTU Library
collection DR-NTU
language English
topic Science::Biological sciences
Machine Learning
Missing Proteins
spellingShingle Science::Biological sciences
Machine Learning
Missing Proteins
Goh, Wilson Wen Bin
Kong, Weijia
Wong, Limsoon
Evaluating network-based missing protein prediction using p-values, Bayes Factors, and probabilities
description Some prediction methods use probability to rank their predictions, while some other prediction methods do not rank their predictions and instead use [Formula: see text]-values to support their predictions. This disparity renders direct cross-comparison of these two kinds of methods difficult. In particular, approaches such as the Bayes Factor upper Bound (BFB) for [Formula: see text]-value conversion may not make correct assumptions for this kind of cross-comparisons. Here, using a well-established case study on renal cancer proteomics and in the context of missing protein prediction, we demonstrate how to compare these two kinds of prediction methods using two different strategies. The first strategy is based on false discovery rate (FDR) estimation, which does not make the same naïve assumptions as BFB conversions. The second strategy is a powerful approach which we colloquially call "home ground testing". Both strategies perform better than BFB conversions. Thus, we recommend comparing prediction methods by standardization to a common performance benchmark such as a global FDR. And where this is not possible, we recommend reciprocal "home ground testing".
author2 School of Biological Sciences
author_facet School of Biological Sciences
Goh, Wilson Wen Bin
Kong, Weijia
Wong, Limsoon
format Article
author Goh, Wilson Wen Bin
Kong, Weijia
Wong, Limsoon
author_sort Goh, Wilson Wen Bin
title Evaluating network-based missing protein prediction using p-values, Bayes Factors, and probabilities
title_short Evaluating network-based missing protein prediction using p-values, Bayes Factors, and probabilities
title_full Evaluating network-based missing protein prediction using p-values, Bayes Factors, and probabilities
title_fullStr Evaluating network-based missing protein prediction using p-values, Bayes Factors, and probabilities
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating network-based missing protein prediction using p-values, Bayes Factors, and probabilities
title_sort evaluating network-based missing protein prediction using p-values, bayes factors, and probabilities
publishDate 2023
url https://hdl.handle.net/10356/169216
_version_ 1772827926181445632