PuSH - Publication Server of Helmholtz Zentrum München: Evaluation of input data modality choices on functional gene embeddings.

Information

Clues to quality of journals

Open Access Policy of Helmholtz Association 2016

CC Licencences

Publication Metrics

Navigation

Home

Deutsch

EVA: Electronic Publishing

New EVA Application

Research

Advanced Search

Browse by ...

... HMGU-Authors/Consortia

... Organizational Structure

... Journal

... Publication Type

... Research Data

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Publication Year

Publication overview

Statistics

Statistics (last 5 years)

OA Publications

Publish

Submit Publication

Import publication from...

...EVA

Report missing publication

Highlights

Support & Contact

Contact persons

Help

Data protection

Helmholtz Open Science

JANE Journal Estimator

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Brechtmann, F.* ; Bechtler, T.* ; Londhe, S.* ; Mertes, C.* ; Gagneur, J.

Evaluation of input data modality choices on functional gene embeddings.

NAR Gen. Bioinfo. 5:lqad095 (2023)

Publ. Version/Full Text

DOI

PMC

	Open Access Gold

Abstract
Metrics
Extra information

Functional gene embeddings, numerical vectors capturing gene function, provide a promising way to integrate functional gene information into machine learning models. These embeddings are learnt by applying self-supervised machine-learning algorithms on various data types including quantitative omics measurements, protein-protein interaction networks and literature. However, downstream evaluations comparing alternative data modalities used to construct functional gene embeddings have been lacking. Here we benchmarked functional gene embeddings obtained from various data modalities for predicting disease-gene lists, cancer drivers, phenotype-gene associations and scores from genome-wide association studies. Off-the-shelf predictors trained on precomputed embeddings matched or outperformed dedicated state-of-the-art predictors, demonstrating their high utility. Embeddings based on literature and protein-protein interactions inferred from low-throughput experiments outperformed embeddings derived from genome-wide experimental data (transcriptomics, deletion screens and protein sequence) when predicting curated gene lists. In contrast, they did not perform better when predicting genome-wide association signals and were biased towards highly-studied genes. These results indicate that embeddings derived from literature and low-throughput experiments appear favourable in many existing benchmarks because they are biased towards well-studied genes and should therefore be considered with caution. Altogether, our study and precomputed embeddings will facilitate the development of machine-learning models in genetics and related fields.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Altmetric

4.600

0.000