Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 384

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A balanced accuracy function for epistasis modeling in imbalanced datasets using multifactor dimensionality reduction

Velez, Digna R., White, Bill C., Motsinger, Alison A., Bush, William S., Ritchie, Marylyn D., Williams, Scott M., Moore, Jason H.·2007·Genetic Epidemiology

Abstract

Multifactor dimensionality reduction (MDR) was developed as a method for detecting statistical patterns of epistasis. The overall goal of MDR is to change the representation space of the data to make interactions easier to detect. It is well known that machine learning methods may not provide robust models when the class variable (e.g. case‐control status) is imbalanced and accuracy is used as the fitness measure. This is because most methods learn patterns that are relevant for the larger of the two classes. The goal of this study was to evaluate three different strategies for improving the power of MDR to detect epistasis in imbalanced datasets. The methods evaluated were: (1) over‐sampling that resamples with replacement the smaller class until the data are balanced, (2) under‐sampling that randomly removes subjects from the larger class until the data are balanced, and (3) balanced accuracy [(sensitivity+specificity)/2] as the fitness function with and without an adjusted threshold. These three methods were compared using simulated data with two‐locus epistatic interactions of varying heritability (0.01, 0.025, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4) and minor allele frequency (0.2, 0.4) that were embedded in 100 replicate datasets of varying sample sizes (400, 800, 1600). Each dataset was generated with different ratios of cases to controls (1 : 1, 1 : 2, 1 : 4). We found that the balanced accuracy function with an adjusted threshold significantly outperformed both over‐sampling and under‐sampling and fully recovered the power. These results suggest that balanced accuracy should be used instead of accuracy for the MDR analysis of epistasis in imbalanced datasets. Genet. Epidemiol.. 2007. © 2007 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/gepi.20211

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 52 references

Cited by

See all 384

Metadata

Authors
Velez, D. R., White, B. C., Motsinger, A. A., Bush, W. S., Ritchie, M. D., Williams, S. M., & Moore, J. H.
Venue
Genetic Epidemiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-02-23
Volume
31
Issue
4
Pages
306-315
ISSN
  • 0741-0395 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-2272
OpenAlex
W2084150578
Cited by
384
References
52
FWCI
11.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A balanced accuracy function for epistasis modeling in imbalanced datasets using multifactor dimensionality reduction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/gepi.20211
The paper
Velez, D. R., White, B. C., Motsinger, A. A., Bush, W. S., Ritchie, M. D., Williams, S. M., & Moore, J. H. (2007). A balanced accuracy function for epistasis modeling in imbalanced datasets using multifactor dimensionality reduction. Genetic Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1002/gepi.20211

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.