Applying Gaussian Distribution-Dependent Criteria to Decision Trees for High-Dimensional Microarray Data
Biological data presents unique problems for data analysis due to its high dimensions. Microarray data is one example of such data which has received much attention in recent years. Machine learning algorithms such as support vector machines (SVM) are ideal for microarray data due to its high classification accuracies. However, sometimes the information being sought is a list of genes which best separates the classes, and not a classification rate.
Decision trees are one alternative which do not perform as well as SVMs, but their output is easily understood by non-specialists. A major obstacle with applying current decision tree implementations for high-dimensional data sets is their tendency to assign the same scores for multiple attributes. In this paper, we propose two distribution-dependant criteria for decision trees to improve their usefulness for microarray classification.
KeywordsSupport Vector Machine Decision Tree Microarray Data Minimum Description Length Gain Ratio
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Quinlan, J.R.: C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1993)Google Scholar
- 3.Witten, I.H., Frank, E.: Data Mining: Practical machine learning tools and techniques with Java implementations, 2nd edn. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco (2005)Google Scholar
- 5.Shang, N., Breiman, L.: Distribution based trees are more accurate. In: Proc. International Conference on Neural Information Processing, pp. 133–138 (1996)Google Scholar
- 7.Alon, U., et al.: Broad patterns of gene expression revealed by clustering analysis of tumor and normal colon tissues probed by oligonucleotide arrays. Proc. National Academy of Sciences USA 96(12), 6745–6750 (1999), Data: http://microarray.princeton.edu/oncology/affydata/index.html CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Press, W.H., Teukolsky, S.A., Vetterling, W.T., Flannery, B.P.: Numerical Recipes in C: The Art of Scientific Computing, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
- 17.Golub, T.R., et al.: Molecular classification of cancer: Class discovery and class prediction by gene expression monitoring. Science 286(5439), 531–537 (1999), Data: http://www.broad.mit.edu/cgi-bin/cancer/datasets.cgi CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Gordon, G.J., et al.: Translation of microarray data into clinically relevant cancer diagnostic tests using gene expression ratios in lung cancer and mesothelioma. Cancer Research 62(17), 4963–4967 (2002), Data: http://www.chestsurg.org/publications/2002-microarray.aspx Google Scholar
- 19.Pomeroy, S.L., et al.: Prediction of central nervous system embryonal tumour outcome based on gene expresion. Nature 415(6870), 436–442 (2002), Data: http://www.broad.mit.edu/cgi-bin/cancer/datasets.cgi CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Ramaswamy, S., et al.: Multiclass cancer diagnosis using tumor gene expression signatures. Proc. National Academy of Sciences USA 98(26), 15149–15154 (2001), Data: http://www.broad.mit.edu/cgi-bin/cancer/datasets.cgi CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Shipp, M.A., et al.: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma outcome prediction by gene-expression profiling and supervised machine learning. Nature Medicine 8(1), 68–74 (2002), Data: http://www.broad.mit.edu/cgi-bin/cancer/datasets.cgi CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Singh, D., et al.: Gene expression correlates of clinical prostate cancer behavior. Cancer Cell 1(2), 203–209 (2002), Data: http://www.broad.mit.edu/cgi-bin/cancer/datasets.cgi CrossRefGoogle Scholar