...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of chemical information and modeling >Comparison of the Predictive Performance and Interpretability of Random Forest and Linear Models on Benchmark Data Sets
【24h】

Comparison of the Predictive Performance and Interpretability of Random Forest and Linear Models on Benchmark Data Sets

机译:基准数据集对随机林和线性模型的预测性能和解释性的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The ability to interpret the predictions made by quantitative structure activity relationships (QSARs) offers a number of advantages. While QSARs built using nonlinear modeling approaches, such as the popular Random Forest algorithm, might sometimes be more predictive than those built using linear modeling approaches, their predictions have been perceived as difficult to interpret. However, a growing number of approaches have been proposed for interpreting nonlinear QSAR models in general and Random Forest in particular. In the current work, we compare the performance of Random Forest to those of two widely used linear modeling approaches: linear Support Vector Machines (SVMs) (or Support Vector Regression (SVR)) and partial least;squares (PLS). We compare their performance in terms of their predictivity as well as the chemical interpretability of the predictions using novel scoring schemes for assessing heat map images of substructural contributions. We critically assess different approaches for interpreting Random Forest models as well as for obtaining predictions from the forest. We assess the models on a large number of widely employed public-domain benchmark data sets corresponding to regression and binary classification problems of relevance to hit identification and toxicology. We conclude that Random Forest typically yields comparable or possibly better predictive performance than the linear modeling approaches and that its predictions may also be interpreted in a chemically and biologically meaningful way. In contrast to earlier work looking at interpretation of nonlinear QSAR models, we directly compare two methodologically distinct approaches for interpreting Random Forest models. The approaches for interpreting Random Forest assessed in our article were implemented using open-source programs that we have made available to the community. These programs are the rfFC package (https://r-forge.r-project.org/R/?group_id=172.5) for the R statistical programming language and the Python program HeatMapWrapper [https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.495163] for heat map generation.
机译:解释通过定量结构活动关系(QSAR)的预测的能力提供了许多优点。虽然使用非线性建模方法构建的QSAR,例如流行的随机森林算法,但有时可能比使用线性建模方法建造的方法更加预测,但它们的预测被认为是难以解释的。然而,已经提出了越来越多的方法,用于在一般和随机森林中解释非线性QSAR模型。在当前的工作中,我们将随机林的性能与两种广泛使用的线性建模方法的性能进行比较:线性支持向量机(SVM)(或支持向量回归(SVR))和部分最小;正方形(PL)。我们在预测性方面比较他们的性能以及使用新的评分计划评估子结构贡献的热图图像的预测的预测的化学解释性。我们批判性地评估解释随机林模型以及从森林获得预测的不同方法。我们在大量广泛采用的公共域基准数据集上评估模型,其对应于与点击识别和毒理学相关的回归和二进制分类问题。我们得出结论,随机森林通常产生比线性建模方法的可比性或可能更好的预测性能,并且其预测也可以以化学和生物学上有意义的方式解释。与早期的工作相比,看着非线性QSAR模型的解释,我们直接比较了两种方法,用于解释随机林模型。使用我们为社区提供的开源计划实施了解释我们的文章中随机森林的方法。这些程序是RFFC包(https://r-forge.r-project.org/r/?group_id=172.5),用于r统计编程语言和python程序heatmapwrapper [https://doi.org/10.5281/ Zenodo.495163]用于热图。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号