60 research outputs found

    Comparative performance of MINDy and CINDy.

    No full text
    <p>Precision and recall values are compared in the B-cell lymphoma dataset (panel A) and Lung Adenocarcinoma dataset (panel B), calculated by matching the predictions with a gold standard dataset set obtained from four different databases of experimentally validated PPIs between modulators and transcription factors. Precision and recall are further compared at different robustness threshold for MINDy (blue line) and CINDy (red line) in the B-cell dataset (panel C) and in the Lung dataset (panel D, see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0109569#s4" target="_blank"><b>Materials and Methods</b></a>).</p

    Schematic representations of the CINDy algorithm.

    No full text
    <p>A collection of gene expression profiles is required to calculate Conditional Mutual Information between lists of modulators, transcription factors and putative target genes, with the final output of inferred modulation events.</p

    Alternative three-way network topologies including a Transcription Factor (TF), a Target gene (Tg) and a Modulator gene (M).

    No full text
    <p>(A) depicts the independent regulation of the target gene by a modulator and a TF; (B) describes a three-way interaction between the TF, the target gene and the modulator.</p

    Schematic overview of the cross-platform study.

    No full text
    Reference samples: Sample set one or set two tested at 30 ng or 50 ng (per vendor’s protocol specification, Table 1) and 10 ng input respectively. For each input level, four samples carrying mutations at VAF of 0%, 0.125%, 0.5% and 1% respectively were tested in duplicate.</p
    corecore