Cargando…
Bias in random forest variable importance measures: Illustrations, sources and a solution
BACKGROUND: Variable importance measures for random forests have been receiving increased attention as a means of variable selection in many classification tasks in bioinformatics and related scientific fields, for instance to select a subset of genetic markers relevant for the prediction of a certa...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2007
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1796903/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17254353 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-8-25 |
_version_ | 1782132269981368320 |
---|---|
author | Strobl, Carolin Boulesteix, Anne-Laure Zeileis, Achim Hothorn, Torsten |
author_facet | Strobl, Carolin Boulesteix, Anne-Laure Zeileis, Achim Hothorn, Torsten |
author_sort | Strobl, Carolin |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Variable importance measures for random forests have been receiving increased attention as a means of variable selection in many classification tasks in bioinformatics and related scientific fields, for instance to select a subset of genetic markers relevant for the prediction of a certain disease. We show that random forest variable importance measures are a sensible means for variable selection in many applications, but are not reliable in situations where potential predictor variables vary in their scale of measurement or their number of categories. This is particularly important in genomics and computational biology, where predictors often include variables of different types, for example when predictors include both sequence data and continuous variables such as folding energy, or when amino acid sequence data show different numbers of categories. RESULTS: Simulation studies are presented illustrating that, when random forest variable importance measures are used with data of varying types, the results are misleading because suboptimal predictor variables may be artificially preferred in variable selection. The two mechanisms underlying this deficiency are biased variable selection in the individual classification trees used to build the random forest on one hand, and effects induced by bootstrap sampling with replacement on the other hand. CONCLUSION: We propose to employ an alternative implementation of random forests, that provides unbiased variable selection in the individual classification trees. When this method is applied using subsampling without replacement, the resulting variable importance measures can be used reliably for variable selection even in situations where the potential predictor variables vary in their scale of measurement or their number of categories. The usage of both random forest algorithms and their variable importance measures in the R system for statistical computing is illustrated and documented thoroughly in an application re-analyzing data from a study on RNA editing. Therefore the suggested method can be applied straightforwardly by scientists in bioinformatics research. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-1796903 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2007 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-17969032007-02-16 Bias in random forest variable importance measures: Illustrations, sources and a solution Strobl, Carolin Boulesteix, Anne-Laure Zeileis, Achim Hothorn, Torsten BMC Bioinformatics Methodology Article BACKGROUND: Variable importance measures for random forests have been receiving increased attention as a means of variable selection in many classification tasks in bioinformatics and related scientific fields, for instance to select a subset of genetic markers relevant for the prediction of a certain disease. We show that random forest variable importance measures are a sensible means for variable selection in many applications, but are not reliable in situations where potential predictor variables vary in their scale of measurement or their number of categories. This is particularly important in genomics and computational biology, where predictors often include variables of different types, for example when predictors include both sequence data and continuous variables such as folding energy, or when amino acid sequence data show different numbers of categories. RESULTS: Simulation studies are presented illustrating that, when random forest variable importance measures are used with data of varying types, the results are misleading because suboptimal predictor variables may be artificially preferred in variable selection. The two mechanisms underlying this deficiency are biased variable selection in the individual classification trees used to build the random forest on one hand, and effects induced by bootstrap sampling with replacement on the other hand. CONCLUSION: We propose to employ an alternative implementation of random forests, that provides unbiased variable selection in the individual classification trees. When this method is applied using subsampling without replacement, the resulting variable importance measures can be used reliably for variable selection even in situations where the potential predictor variables vary in their scale of measurement or their number of categories. The usage of both random forest algorithms and their variable importance measures in the R system for statistical computing is illustrated and documented thoroughly in an application re-analyzing data from a study on RNA editing. Therefore the suggested method can be applied straightforwardly by scientists in bioinformatics research. BioMed Central 2007-01-25 /pmc/articles/PMC1796903/ /pubmed/17254353 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-8-25 Text en Copyright © 2007 Strobl et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Methodology Article Strobl, Carolin Boulesteix, Anne-Laure Zeileis, Achim Hothorn, Torsten Bias in random forest variable importance measures: Illustrations, sources and a solution |
title | Bias in random forest variable importance measures: Illustrations, sources and a solution |
title_full | Bias in random forest variable importance measures: Illustrations, sources and a solution |
title_fullStr | Bias in random forest variable importance measures: Illustrations, sources and a solution |
title_full_unstemmed | Bias in random forest variable importance measures: Illustrations, sources and a solution |
title_short | Bias in random forest variable importance measures: Illustrations, sources and a solution |
title_sort | bias in random forest variable importance measures: illustrations, sources and a solution |
topic | Methodology Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1796903/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17254353 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-8-25 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT stroblcarolin biasinrandomforestvariableimportancemeasuresillustrationssourcesandasolution AT boulesteixannelaure biasinrandomforestvariableimportancemeasuresillustrationssourcesandasolution AT zeileisachim biasinrandomforestvariableimportancemeasuresillustrationssourcesandasolution AT hothorntorsten biasinrandomforestvariableimportancemeasuresillustrationssourcesandasolution |