The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
New feature subset selection procedures for classification of expression profiles
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Methods for extracting useful information from the datasets produced by microarray experiments are at present of much interest. Here we present new methods for finding gene sets that are well suited for distinguishing experiment classes, such as healthy versus diseased tissues. Our methods are based on evaluating genes in pairs and evaluating how well a pair in combination distinguishes two experiment classes. We tested the ability of our pair-based methods to select gene sets that generalize the differences between experiment classes and compared the performance relative to two standard methods. To assess the ability to generalize class differences, we studied how well the gene sets we select are suited for learning a classifier. RESULTS: We show that the gene sets selected by our methods outperform the standard methods, in some cases by a large margin, in terms of cross-validation prediction accuracy of the learned classifier. We show that on two public datasets, accurate diagnoses can be made using only 15-30 genes. Our results have implications for how to select marker genes and how many gene measurements are needed for diagnostic purposes. CONCLUSION: When looking for differential expression between experiment classes, it may not be sufficient to look at each gene in a separate universe. Evaluating combinations of genes reveals interesting information that will not be discovered otherwise. Our results show that class prediction can be improved by taking advantage of this extra information.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Khan, J., Wei, J. S., Ringnér, M., Saal, L. H., Ladanyi, M., Westermann, F., Berthold, F., Schwab, M., Antonescu, C. R., Peterson, C., et al. (2001) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/89044 · Cited by 2,644
Cited by
Supervised, Unsupervised, and Semi-Supervised Feature Selection: A Review on Gene Selection
Ang, J. C., Mirzal, A., Haron, H., & Hamed, H. N. A. (2016) · IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1109/tcbb.2015.2478454 · Cited by 641
A survey on filter techniques for feature selection in gene expression microarray analysis
Lazar, C., Taminau, J., Meganck, S., Steenhoff, D., Coletta, A., Molter, C., de Schaetzen, V., Duque, R., Bersini, H., & Nowe, A. (2012) · IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1109/tcbb.2012.33 · Cited by 619
Feature selection with multi-view data: A survey
Zhang, R., Nie, F., Li, X., & Wei, X. (2019) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2018.11.019 · Cited by 313
Ohira, M., Oba, S., Nakamura, Y., Isogai, E., Kaneko, S., Nakagawa, A., Hirata, T., Kubo, H., Goto, T., Yamada, S., et al. (2005) · Cancer Cell · doi:10.1016/j.ccr.2005.03.019 · Cited by 155
Xie, X., Wu, C., Ma, C., Gao, D., Su, W., Huang, J., Deng, K., Yan, D., & Lin, H. (2024) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2024.124702 · Cited by 17
Metadata
- Authors
- Bø, T. H., & Jonassen, I.
- Venue
- Genome Biology
- Published
- 2002-03-14
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- RESEARCH0017-RESEARCH0017
- ISSN
- 1465-6906 (ISSN-L)
- 1474-760X
- OpenAlex
- W1836115926
- Cited by
- 263
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: New feature subset selection procedures for classification of expression profiles. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/gb-2002-3-4-research0017
- The paper
- Bø, T. H., & Jonassen, I. (2002). New feature subset selection procedures for classification of expression profiles. Genome Biology. https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-2002-3-4-research0017
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.