You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A semi–supervised tensor regression model for siRNA efficacy prediction
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Bioinformatics, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12859-015-0495-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bui Ngoc Thang, Tu Bao Ho, Tatsuo Kanda |
| Abstract |
Short interfering RNAs (siRNAs) can knockdown target genes and thus have an immense impact on biology and pharmacy research. The key question of which siRNAs have high knockdown ability in siRNA research remains challenging as current known results are still far from expectation. This work aims to develop a generic framework to enhance siRNA knockdown efficacy prediction. The key idea is first to enrich siRNA sequences by incorporating them with rules found for designing effective siRNAs and representing them as enriched matrices, then to employ the bilinear tensor regression to predict knockdown efficacy of those matrices. Experiments show that the proposed method achieves better results than existing models in most cases. Our model not only provides a suitable siRNA representation but also can predict siRNA efficacy more accurate and stable than most of state-of-the-art models. Source codes are freely available on the web at: http://www.jaist.ac.jp/\~bao/BiLTR/ . |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 12% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unknown | 4 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 24% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 12% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unknown | 4 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 March 2015.
All research outputs
#16,099,609
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#5,488
of 7,454 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,292
of 262,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#103
of 143 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,454 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 262,925 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 143 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.