The ENCODE Imputation Challenge: A critical assessment of methods for cross-cell type imputation of epigenomic profiles

Author:

Schreiber JacobORCID,Boix Carles,Lee Jin wook,Li Hongyang,Guan Yuanfang,Chang Chun-Chieh,Chang Jen-Chien,Hawkins-Hooker Alex,Schölkopf Bernhard,Schweikert Gabriele,Carulla Mateo Rojas,Canakoglu Arif,Guzzo Francesco,Nanni Luca,Masseroli Marco,Carman Mark James,Pinoli Pietro,Hong Chenyang,Yip Kevin Y.,Spence Jeffrey P.,Batra Sanjit Singh,Song Yun S.,Mahony Shaun,Zhang Zheng,Tan Wuwei,Shen Yang,Sun Yuanfei,Shi Minyi,Adrian Jessika,Sandstrom Richard,Farrell Nina,Halow Jessica,Lee Kristen,Jiang Lixia,Yang Xinqiong,Epstein Charles,Strattan J. Seth,Snyder Michael,Kellis Manolis,Noble William Stafford,Kundaje Anshul,

Abstract

AbstractFunctional genomics experiments are invaluable for understanding mechanisms of gene regulation. However, comprehensively performing all such experiments, even across a fixed set of sample and assay types, is often infeasible in practice. A promising alternative to performing experiments exhaustively is to, instead, perform a core set of experiments and subsequently use machine learning methods to impute the remaining experiments. However, questions remain as to the quality of the imputations, the best approaches for performing imputations, and even what performance measures meaningfully evaluate performance of such models. In this work, we address these questions by comprehensively analyzing imputations from 23 imputation models submitted to the ENCODE Imputation Challenge. We find that measuring the quality of imputations is significantly more challenging than reported in the literature, and is confounded by three factors: major distributional shifts that arise because of differences in data collection and processing over time, the amount of available data per cell type, and redundancy among performance measures. Our systematic analyses suggest several steps that are necessary, but also simple, for fairly evaluating the performance of such models, as well as promising directions for more robust research in this area.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3