NIMEFI: Gene Regulatory Network Inference using Multiple Ensemble Feature Importance Algorithms

One of the long-standing open challenges in computational systems biology is the topology inference of gene regulatory networks from high-throughput omics data. Recently, two community-wide efforts, DREAM4 and DREAM5, have been established to benchmark network inference techniques using gene expression measurements. In these challenges the overall top performer was the GENIE3 algorithm. This method decomposes the network inference task into separate regression problems for each gene in the network in which the expression values of a particular target gene are predicted using all other genes as possible predictors. Next, using tree-based ensemble methods, an importance measure for each predictor gene is calculated with respect to the target gene and a high feature importance is considered as putative evidence of a regulatory link existing between both genes. The contribution of this work is twofold. First, we generalize the regression decomposition strategy of GENIE3 to other feature importance methods. We compare the performance of support vector regression, the elastic net, random forest regression, symbolic regression and their ensemble variants in this setting to the original GENIE3 algorithm. To create the ensemble variants, we propose a subsampling approach which allows us to cast any feature selection algorithm that produces a feature ranking into an ensemble feature importance algorithm. We demonstrate that the ensemble setting is key to the network inference task, as only ensemble variants achieve top performance. As second contribution, we explore the effect of using rankwise averaged predictions of multiple ensemble algorithms as opposed to only one. We name this approach NIMEFI (Network Inference using Multiple Ensemble Feature Importance algorithms) and show that this approach outperforms all individual methods in general, although on a specific network a single method can perform better. An implementation of NIMEFI has been made publicly available

Unsupervised GRN ensemble

Inferring gene regulatory networks from expression data is a very challenging problem that has raised the interest of the scientific community. Different algorithms have been proposed to try to solve this issue, but it has been shown that different methods have some particular biases and strengths, and none of them is the best across all types of data and datasets. As a result, the idea of aggregating various network inferences through a consensus mechanism naturally arises. In this chapter, a common framework to standardize already proposed consensus methods is presented, and based on this framework different proposals are introduced and analyzed in two different scenarios: Homogeneous and Heterogeneous. The first scenario reflects situations where the networks to be aggregated are rather similar because they are obtained with inference algorithms working on the same data, whereas the second scenario deals with very diverse networks because various sources of data are used to generate the individual networks. A procedure for combining multiple network inference algorithms is analyzed in a systematic way. The results show that there is a very significant difference between these two scenarios, and that the best way to combine networks in the Heterogeneous scenario is not the most commonly used. We show in particular that aggregation in the Heterogeneous scenario can be very beneficial if the individual networks are combined with our new proposed method ScaleLSum.Peer reviewe

Unsupervised GRN Ensemble

Inferring gene regulatory networks from expression data is a very challenging problem that has raised the interest of the scientific community. Different algorithms have been proposed to try to solve this issue, but it has been shown that different methods have some particular biases and strengths, and none of them is the best across all types of data and datasets. As a result, the idea of aggregating various network inferences through a consensus mechanism naturally arises. In this chapter, a common framework to standardize already proposed consensus methods is presented, and based on this framework different proposals are introduced and analyzed in two different scenarios: Homogeneous and Heterogeneous. The first scenario reflects situations where the networks to be aggregated are rather similar because they are obtained with inference algorithms working on the same data, whereas the second scenario deals with very diverse networks because various sources of data are used to generate the individual networks. A procedure for combining multiple network inference algorithms is analyzed in a systematic way. The results show that there is a very significant difference between these two scenarios, and that the best way to combine networks in the Heterogeneous scenario is not the most commonly used. We show in particular that aggregation in the Heterogeneous scenario can be very beneficial if the individual networks are combined with our new proposed method ScaleLSum.Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version