↓ Skip to main content

A Network-based Approach for Predicting Missing Pathway Interactions

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
153 Mendeley
citeulike
16 CiteULike
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.
Title
A Network-based Approach for Predicting Missing Pathway Interactions
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, August 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002640
Pubmed ID
Authors

Saket Navlakha, Anthony Gitter, Ziv Bar-Joseph

Abstract

Embedded within large-scale protein interaction networks are signaling pathways that encode response cascades in the cell. Unfortunately, even for well-studied species like S. cerevisiae, only a fraction of all true protein interactions are known, which makes it difficult to reason about the exact flow of signals and the corresponding causal relations in the network. To help address this problem, we introduce a framework for predicting new interactions that aid connectivity between upstream proteins (sources) and downstream transcription factors (targets) of a particular pathway. Our algorithms attempt to globally minimize the distance between sources and targets by finding a small set of shortcut edges to add to the network. Unlike existing algorithms for predicting general protein interactions, by focusing on proteins involved in specific responses our approach homes-in on pathway-consistent interactions. We applied our method to extend pathways in osmotic stress response in yeast and identified several missing interactions, some of which are supported by published reports. We also performed experiments that support a novel interaction not previously reported. Our framework is general and may be applicable to edge prediction problems in other domains.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 153 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 8 5%
United Kingdom 3 2%
Germany 2 1%
Spain 2 1%
Japan 2 1%
India 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Egypt 1 <1%
Other 3 2%
Unknown 129 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 46 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 24%
Student > Master 15 10%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 6%
Other 22 14%
Unknown 12 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 67 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 24 16%
Computer Science 21 14%
Mathematics 5 3%
Chemistry 3 2%
Other 17 11%
Unknown 16 10%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 17 August 2012.
All research outputs
#8,186,806
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#5,425
of 8,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,032
of 174,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#51
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,960 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 174,033 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.