Cargando…

Extending the mutual information measure to rank inferred literature relationships

BACKGROUND: Within the peer-reviewed literature, associations between two things are not always recognized until commonalities between them become apparent. These commonalities can provide justification for the inference of a new relationship where none was previously known, and are the basis of mos...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Wren, Jonathan D
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2004
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC526381/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15471547
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-5-145
_version_ 1782121938065293312
author Wren, Jonathan D
author_facet Wren, Jonathan D
author_sort Wren, Jonathan D
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Within the peer-reviewed literature, associations between two things are not always recognized until commonalities between them become apparent. These commonalities can provide justification for the inference of a new relationship where none was previously known, and are the basis of most observation-based hypothesis formation. It has been shown that the crux of the problem is not finding inferable associations, which are extraordinarily abundant given the scale-free networks that arise from literature-based associations, but determining which ones are informative. The Mutual Information Measure (MIM) is a well-established method to measure how informative an association is, but is limited to direct (i.e. observable) associations. RESULTS: Herein, we attempt to extend the calculation of mutual information to indirect (i.e. inferable) associations by using the MIM of shared associations. Objects of general research interest (e.g. genes, diseases, phenotypes, drugs, ontology categories) found within MEDLINE are used to create a network of associations for evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Mutual information calculations can be effectively extended into implied relationships and a significance cutoff estimated from analysis of random word networks. Of the models tested, the shared minimum MIM (MMIM) model is found to correlate best with the observed strength and frequency of known associations. Using three test cases, the MMIM method tends to rank more specific relationships higher than counting the number of shared relationships within a network.
format Text
id pubmed-526381
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2004
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-5263812004-11-10 Extending the mutual information measure to rank inferred literature relationships Wren, Jonathan D BMC Bioinformatics Research Article BACKGROUND: Within the peer-reviewed literature, associations between two things are not always recognized until commonalities between them become apparent. These commonalities can provide justification for the inference of a new relationship where none was previously known, and are the basis of most observation-based hypothesis formation. It has been shown that the crux of the problem is not finding inferable associations, which are extraordinarily abundant given the scale-free networks that arise from literature-based associations, but determining which ones are informative. The Mutual Information Measure (MIM) is a well-established method to measure how informative an association is, but is limited to direct (i.e. observable) associations. RESULTS: Herein, we attempt to extend the calculation of mutual information to indirect (i.e. inferable) associations by using the MIM of shared associations. Objects of general research interest (e.g. genes, diseases, phenotypes, drugs, ontology categories) found within MEDLINE are used to create a network of associations for evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Mutual information calculations can be effectively extended into implied relationships and a significance cutoff estimated from analysis of random word networks. Of the models tested, the shared minimum MIM (MMIM) model is found to correlate best with the observed strength and frequency of known associations. Using three test cases, the MMIM method tends to rank more specific relationships higher than counting the number of shared relationships within a network. BioMed Central 2004-10-07 /pmc/articles/PMC526381/ /pubmed/15471547 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-5-145 Text en Copyright © 2004 Wren; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
spellingShingle Research Article
Wren, Jonathan D
Extending the mutual information measure to rank inferred literature relationships
title Extending the mutual information measure to rank inferred literature relationships
title_full Extending the mutual information measure to rank inferred literature relationships
title_fullStr Extending the mutual information measure to rank inferred literature relationships
title_full_unstemmed Extending the mutual information measure to rank inferred literature relationships
title_short Extending the mutual information measure to rank inferred literature relationships
title_sort extending the mutual information measure to rank inferred literature relationships
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC526381/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15471547
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-5-145
work_keys_str_mv AT wrenjonathand extendingthemutualinformationmeasuretorankinferredliteraturerelationships