An Expanded Evaluation of Protein Function Prediction Methods Shows an Improvement In Accuracy

Background: A major bottleneck in our understanding of the molecular underpinnings of life is the assignment of function to proteins. While molecular experiments provide the most reliable annotation of proteins, their relatively low throughput and restricted purview have led to an increasing role for computational function prediction. However, assessing methods for protein function prediction and tracking progress in the field remain challenging. Results: We conducted the second critical assessment of functional annotation (CAFA), a timed challenge to assess computational methods that automatically assign protein function. We evaluated 126 methods from 56 research groups for their ability to predict biological functions using Gene Ontology and gene-disease associations using Human Phenotype Ontology on a set of 3681 proteins from 18 species. CAFA2 featured expanded analysis compared with CAFA1, with regards to data set size, variety, and assessment metrics. To review progress in the field, the analysis compared the best methods from CAFA1 to those of CAFA2. Conclusions: The top-performing methods in CAFA2 outperformed those from CAFA1. This increased accuracy can be attributed to a combination of the growing number of experimental annotations and improved methods for function prediction. The assessment also revealed that the definition of top-performing algorithms is ontology specific, that different performance metrics can be used to probe the nature of accurate predictions, and the relative diversity of predictions in the biological process and human phenotype ontologies. While there was methodological improvement between CAFA1 and CAFA2, the interpretation of results and usefulness of individual methods remain context-dependent

An expanded evaluation of protein function prediction methods shows an improvement in accuracy

Background: A major bottleneck in our understanding of the molecular underpinnings of life is the assignment of function to proteins. While molecular experiments provide the most reliable annotation of proteins, their relatively low throughput and restricted purview have led to an increasing role for computational function prediction. However, assessing methods for protein function prediction and tracking progress in the field remain challenging. Results: We conducted the second critical assessment of functional annotation (CAFA), a timed challenge to assess computational methods that automatically assign protein function. We evaluated 126 methods from 56 research groups for their ability to predict biological functions using Gene Ontology and gene-disease associations using Human Phenotype Ontology on a set of 3681 proteins from 18 species. CAFA2 featured expanded analysis compared with CAFA1, with regards to data set size, variety, and assessment metrics. To review progress in the field, the analysis compared the best methods from CAFA1 to those of CAFA2. Conclusions: The top-performing methods in CAFA2 outperformed those from CAFA1. This increased accuracy can be attributed to a combination of the growing number of experimental annotations and improved methods for function prediction. The assessment also revealed that the definition of top-performing algorithms is ontology specific, that different performance metrics can be used to probe the nature of accurate predictions, and the relative diversity of predictions in the biological process and human phenotype ontologies. While there was methodological improvement between CAFA1 and CAFA2, the interpretation of results and usefulness of individual methods remain context-dependent. Keywords: Protein function prediction, Disease gene prioritizationpublishedVersio

Positive-Unlabeled Learning in the Context of Protein Function Prediction

With the recent proliferation of large, unlabeled data sets, a particular subclass of semisupervised learning problems has become more prevalent. Known as positive-unlabeled learning (PU learning), this scenario provides only positive labeled examples, usually just a small fraction of the entire dataset, with the remaining examples unknown and thus potentially belonging to either the positive or negative class. Since the vast majority of traditional machine learning classifiers require both positive and negative examples in the training set, a new class of algorithms has been developed to deal with PU learning problems. A canonical example of this scenario is topic labeling of a large corpus of documents. Once the size of a corpus reaches into the thousands, it becomes largely infeasible to have a curator read even a sizable fraction of the documents, and annotate them with topics. In addition, the entire set of topics may not be known, or may change over time, making it impossible for a curator to annotate which documents are NOT about certain topics. Thus a machine learning algorithm needs to be able to learn from a small set of positive examples, without knowledge of the negative class, and knowing that the unlabeled training examples may contain an arbitrary number of additional but as yet unknown positive examples. Another example of a PU learning scenario recently garnering attention is the protein function prediction problem (PFP problem). While the number of organisms with fully sequenced genomes continues to grow, the progress of annotating those sequences with the biological functions that they perform lags far behind. Machine learning methods have already been successfully applied to this problem, but with many organisms having a small number of positive annotated training examples, and the lack of availability of almost any labeled negative examples, PU learning algorithms have the potential to make large gains in predictive performance. The first part of this dissertation motivates the protein function prediction problem, explores previous work, and introduces novel methods that improve upon previously reported benchmarks for a particular type of learning algorithm, known as Gaussian Random Field Label Propagation (GRFLP). In addition, we present improvements to the computational efficiency of the GRFLP algorithm, and a modification to the traditional structure of the PFP learning problem that allows for simultaneous prediction across multiple species. The second part of the dissertation focuses specifically on the positive-unlabeled aspects of the PFP problem. Two novel algorithms are presented, and rigorously compared to existing PU learning techniques in the context of protein function prediction. Additionally, we take a step back and examine some of the theoretical considerations of the PU scenario in general, and provide an additional novel algorithm applicable in any PU context. This algorithm is tailored for situations in which the labeled positive examples are a small fraction of the set of true positive examples, and where the labeling process may be subject to some type of bias rather than being a random selection of true positives (arguably some of the most difficult PU learning scenarios). The third and fourth sections return to the PFP problem, examining the power of tertiary structure as a predictor of protein function, as well as presenting two case studies of function prediction performance on novel benchmarks. Lastly, we conclude with several promising avenues of future research into both PU learning in general, and the protein function prediction problem specifically

Negative Example Selection for Protein Function Prediction: The NoGO Database

<div><p>Negative examples – genes that are known <i>not</i> to carry out a given protein function – are rarely recorded in genome and proteome annotation databases, such as the Gene Ontology database. Negative examples are required, however, for several of the most powerful machine learning methods for integrative protein function prediction. Most protein function prediction efforts have relied on a variety of heuristics for the choice of negative examples. Determining the accuracy of methods for negative example prediction is itself a non-trivial task, given that the Open World Assumption as applied to gene annotations rules out many traditional validation metrics. We present a rigorous comparison of these heuristics, utilizing a temporal holdout, and a novel evaluation strategy for negative examples. We add to this comparison several algorithms adapted from Positive-Unlabeled learning scenarios in text-classification, which are the current state of the art methods for generating negative examples in low-density annotation contexts. Lastly, we present two novel algorithms of our own construction, one based on empirical conditional probability, and the other using topic modeling applied to genes and annotations. We demonstrate that our algorithms achieve significantly fewer incorrect negative example predictions than the current state of the art, using multiple benchmarks covering multiple organisms. Our methods may be applied to generate negative examples for any type of method that deals with protein function, and to this end we provide a database of negative examples in several well-studied organisms, for general use (The NoGO database, available at: bonneaulab.bio.nyu.edu/nogo.html).</p></div

Performance measures for negative example prediction on the human genome.

<p>The number of erroneous negative example predictions is plotted as a function of the number of negative examples chosen, for each of the three branches of GO. The Rocchio, NETL, and SNOB algorithms show consistently strong performance, with SNOB achieving the lowest error rate in each branch. The “Sibling” and “All non-positive as negative” heuristics have been omitted, as their poor performance dramatically skewed the scale of the images (see <a href="http://www.ploscompbiol.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003644#pcbi.1003644.s003" target="_blank">figure S3</a> for results including the sibling method).</p

Performance measures for function prediction.

<p>AUC_ROC measures for function prediction using the best-performing negative example selection methods, with the random negative example selector included for comparison. Performance measures are broken up by ontology branch, and represent the average AUC_ROC for all GO terms predicted in that branch.</p

Performance measures for RNA binding.

<p>Performance of the competing algorithms on a specific GO category: GO:0003723 RNA binding, with validation data augmented by annotations taken from <a href="http://www.ploscompbiol.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003644#pcbi.1003644-Baltz1" target="_blank">[16]</a>. The left panel shows the complete results, while the right is a scaled to see the differences between algorithms near the origin. The SNOB algorithm achieves the fewest false negatives for large numbers of negative examples, while the Rocchio and NETL algorithms maintain a zero false negative rate for a greater number of negative examples.</p

Performance measures for mitochondrian organization.

<p>ROC curves are depicted for each algorithm on the golden set of annotations for GO:0007005 in yeast, calculated through cross-validation. SNOB shows the highest area under the curve (AUC), followed by NETL and Rocchio, which have approximately equal AUCs.</p