By Topic

Comparison of Co-temporal Modeling Algorithms on Sparse Experimental Time Series Data Sets

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

6 Author(s)
Allen, E.E. ; Dept. of Math., Wake Forest Univ., Winston-Salem, NC, USA ; Norris, J.L. ; John, D.J. ; Thomas, S.J.
more authors

Multiple approaches for reverse-engineering bio-logical networks from time-series data have been proposed in the computational biology literature. These approaches can be classified by their underlying mathematical algorithms, such as Bayesian or algebraic techniques, as well as by their time paradigm, which includes next-state and co-temporal modeling. The types of biological relationships, such as parent-child or siblings, discovered by these algorithms are quite varied. It is important to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the various algorithms and time paradigms on actual experimental data. We assess how well the co-temporal implementations of three algorithms, continuous Bayesian, discrete Bayesian, and computational algebraic, can 1) identify two types of entity relationships, parent and sibling, between biological entities, 2) deal with experimental sparse time course data, and 3) handle experimental noise seen in replicate data sets. These algorithms are evaluated, using the shuffle index metric, for how well the resulting models match literature models in terms of siblings and parent relationships. Results indicate that all three co-temporal algorithms perform well, at a statistically significant level, at finding sibling relationships, but perform relatively poorly in finding parent relationships.

Published in:

BioInformatics and BioEngineering (BIBE), 2010 IEEE International Conference on

Date of Conference:

May 31 2010-June 3 2010