Advertisement

Journal of Combinatorial Optimization

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 7–21 | Cite as

Feature Selection for Consistent Biclustering via Fractional 0–1 Programming

  • Stanislav Busygin
  • Oleg A. Prokopyev
  • Panos M. Pardalos
Article

Abstract

Biclustering consists in simultaneous partitioning of the set of samples and the set of their attributes (features) into subsets (classes). Samples and features classified together are supposed to have a high relevance to each other which can be observed by intensity of their expressions. We define the notion of consistency for biclustering using interrelation between centroids of sample and feature classes. We prove that consistent biclustering implies separability of the classes by convex cones. While previous works on biclustering concentrated on unsupervised learning and did not consider employing a training set, whose classification is given, we propose a model for supervised biclustering, whose consistency is achieved by feature selection. The developed model involves solution of a fractional 0–1 programming problem. Preliminary computational results on microarray data mining problems are reported.

Keywords

feature selection biclustering classification supervised learning microarrays 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. A. Ben-Dor, L. Bruhn, I. Nachman, M. Schummer, and Z. Yakhini, “Tissue classification with gene expression profiles,” Journal of Computational Biology, vol. 7, pp. 559–584, 2000.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. A. Ben-Dor, N. Friedman, and Z. Yakhini, “Class discovery in gene expression data,” in Proc. Fifth Annual Inter. Conf. on Computational Molecular Biology (RECOMB), 2001.Google Scholar
  3. S. Busygin, G. Jacobsen, and E. Krámer, “Double Conjugated Clustering Applied to Leukemia Microarray Data,” SDM 2002 Workshop on Clustering High Dimensional Data and its Applications, 2002.Google Scholar
  4. Y. Cheng and G.M. Church, “Biclustering of Expression Data,” in: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Intelligent Systems for Molecular Biology, 2000, pp. 93–103.Google Scholar
  5. I.S. Dhillon, “Co-Clustering Documents and Words Using Bipartite Spectral Graph Partitioning,” in: Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining(KDD), August 26–29, 2001, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  6. P. Hansen, M. Poggi de Aragão, and C.C. Ribeiro, “Hyperbolic 0–1 programming and query optimization in information retrieval,” Math. Program., vol. 52, pp. 256–263, 1991.Google Scholar
  7. S. Hashizume, M. Fukushima, N. Katoh, and T. Ibaraki, “Approximation algortihms for combinatorial fractional programming problems,” Mathematical Programming, vol. 37, pp. 255–267.Google Scholar
  8. L.-L. Hsiao, F. Dangond, T. Yoshida, R. Hong, R.V. Jensen, J. Misra, W. Dillon, K.F. Lee, KE. Clark, P. Haverty, Z. Weng, G. Mutter, M.P. Frosch, M.E. MacDonald, E.L. Milford, C.P. Crum, R. Bueno, R.E. Pratt, M. Mahadevappa, J.A. Warrington, G. Stephanopoulos, G. Stephanopoulos, and S.R. Gullans, “A Compendium of Gene Expression in Normal Human Tissues,” Physiol. Genomics, vol. 7, pp. 97–104, 2001.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. T.R. Golub, D.K. Slonim, P. Tamayo, C. Huard, M. Gaasenbeek, J.P. Mesirov, H. Coller, M.L. Loh, J.R. Downing, M.A. Caligiuri, C.D. Bloomfield, and E.S. Lander, “Molecular classification of cancer: Class discovery and class prediction by gene expression monitoring,” Science, vol. 286, pp. 531–537, 1999.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Y. Kluger, R. Basri, J.T. Chang, and M. Gerstein, “Spectral biclustering of microarray data: Coclustering genes and conditions,” Genome Res, vol. 13, pp. 703–716, 2003.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. J.-C. Picard and M. Queyranne, “A network flow solution to some nonlinear 0–1 programming problems, with applications to graph theory,” Networks, vol. 12, pp. 141–159, 1982.Google Scholar
  12. O.A. Prokopyev, H.-X. Huang, and P.M. Pardalos, “On complexity of unconstrained hyperbolic 0–1 programming problems,” Oper. Res. Lett., vol. 33, pp. 312–318, 2005a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. O.A. Prokopyev, C. Meneses, C.A.S. Oliveira, and P.M. Pardalos, “On Multiple-Ratio Hyperbolic 0–1 Programming Problems,” to appear in Pacific Journal of Optimization, 2005b.Google Scholar
  14. S. Saipe, “Solving a (0,1) hyperbolic program by branch and bound,” Naval Res. Logist. Quarterly, vol. 22, pp. 497–515, 1975.Google Scholar
  15. M. Tawarmalani, S. Ahmed, and N. Sahinidis, “Global optimization of 0–1 Hyperbolic Programs,” J. Global Optim., vol. 24, pp. 385–416, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. J. Weston, S. Mukherjee, O. Chapelle, M. Pontil, T. Poggio, and V. Vapnik, Feature selection for SVMs. NIPS, 2001.Google Scholar
  17. T.-H. Wu, “A note on a global approach for general 0–1 fractional programming,” European J. Oper. Res., vol. 101, pp. 220–223, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. E.P. Xing and R.M. Karp “CLIFF: Clustering of high-dimensional microarray data via iterative feature filtering using normalized cuts,” Bioinformatics Discovery Note, vol. 1, pp. 1–9, 2001.Google Scholar
  19. HuGE Index.org Website. http://www.hugeindex.org.
  20. ILOG Inc. CPLEX 9.0 User’s Manual, 2004.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stanislav Busygin
    • 1
  • Oleg A. Prokopyev
    • 1
  • Panos M. Pardalos
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Industrial and Systems EngineeringUniversity of FloridaGainesville
  2. 2.Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Biomedical Engineering ProgramMcKnight Brain Institute, University of FloridaGainesville

Personalised recommendations