Skip to main content
Cornell University
We gratefully acknowledge support from the Simons Foundation, member institutions, and all contributors. Donate
arxiv logo > cs > arXiv:1305.4525

Help | Advanced Search

arXiv logo
Cornell University Logo

quick links

  • Login
  • Help Pages
  • About

Computer Science > Machine Learning

arXiv:1305.4525 (cs)
[Submitted on 20 May 2013 (v1), last revised 18 Oct 2013 (this version, v3)]

Title:Robustness of Random Forest-based gene selection methods

Authors:Miron B. Kursa
View a PDF of the paper titled Robustness of Random Forest-based gene selection methods, by Miron B. Kursa
View PDF
Abstract:Gene selection is an important part of microarray data analysis because it provides information that can lead to a better mechanistic understanding of an investigated phenomenon. At the same time, gene selection is very difficult because of the noisy nature of microarray data. As a consequence, gene selection is often performed with machine learning methods. The Random Forest method is particularly well suited for this purpose. In this work, four state-of-the-art Random Forest-based feature selection methods were compared in a gene selection context. The analysis focused on the stability of selection because, although it is necessary for determining the significance of results, it is often ignored in similar studies.
The comparison of post-selection accuracy in the validation of Random Forest classifiers revealed that all investigated methods were equivalent in this context. However, the methods substantially differed with respect to the number of selected genes and the stability of selection. Of the analysed methods, the Boruta algorithm predicted the most genes as potentially important.
The post-selection classifier error rate, which is a frequently used measure, was found to be a potentially deceptive measure of gene selection quality. When the number of consistently selected genes was considered, the Boruta algorithm was clearly the best. Although it was also the most computationally intensive method, the Boruta algorithm's computational demands could be reduced to levels comparable to those of other algorithms by replacing the Random Forest importance with a comparable measure from Random Ferns (a similar but simplified classifier). Despite their design assumptions, the minimal optimal selection methods, were found to select a high fraction of false positives.
Subjects: Machine Learning (cs.LG); Quantitative Methods (q-bio.QM)
Cite as: arXiv:1305.4525 [cs.LG]
  (or arXiv:1305.4525v3 [cs.LG] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1305.4525
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Miron Kursa [view email]
[v1] Mon, 20 May 2013 13:39:03 UTC (12 KB)
[v2] Fri, 27 Sep 2013 23:12:50 UTC (44 KB)
[v3] Fri, 18 Oct 2013 15:30:45 UTC (44 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

    View a PDF of the paper titled Robustness of Random Forest-based gene selection methods, by Miron B. Kursa
  • View PDF
  • TeX Source
  • Other Formats
view license
Current browse context:
cs.LG
< prev   |   next >
new | recent | 2013-05
Change to browse by:
cs
q-bio
q-bio.QM

References & Citations

  • NASA ADS
  • Google Scholar
  • Semantic Scholar

DBLP - CS Bibliography

listing | bibtex
Miron B. Kursa
export BibTeX citation Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

×
Data provided by:

Bookmark

BibSonomy logo Reddit logo

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Recommenders and Search Tools

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
IArxiv Recommender (What is IArxiv?)
  • Author
  • Venue
  • Institution
  • Topic

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
  • About
  • Help
  • contact arXivClick here to contact arXiv Contact
  • subscribe to arXiv mailingsClick here to subscribe Subscribe
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Web Accessibility Assistance
  • arXiv Operational Status
    Get status notifications via email or slack