Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPrill, Robert J.
dc.contributor.authorMarbach, Daniel
dc.contributor.authorSaez-Rodriguez, Julio
dc.contributor.authorSorger, Peter Karl
dc.contributor.authorAlexopoulos, Leonidas G.
dc.contributor.authorXue, Xiaowei
dc.contributor.authorClarke, Neil D.
dc.contributor.authorAltan-Bonnet, Gregoire
dc.contributor.authorStolovitzky, Gustavo
dc.date.accessioned2012-01-14T22:12:09Z
dc.date.issued2010
dc.identifier.citationPrill, Robert J., Daniel Marbach, Julio Saez-Rodriguez, Peter K. Sorger, Leonidas G. Alexopoulos, Xiaowei Xue, Neil D. Clarke, Gregoire Altan-Bonnet, and Gustavo Stolovitzky. 2010. Towards a Rigorous Assessment of Systems Biology Models: The DREAM3 Challenges. PLoS ONE 5(2):e9202.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1932-6203en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:7628414
dc.description.abstractBackground: Systems biology has embraced computational modeling in response to the quantitative nature and increasing scale of contemporary data sets. The onslaught of data is accelerating as molecular profiling technology evolves. The Dialogue for Reverse Engineering Assessments and Methods (DREAM) is a community effort to catalyze discussion about the design, application, and assessment of systems biology models through annual reverse-engineering challenges. Methodology and Principal Findings: We describe our assessments of the four challenges associated with the third DREAM conference which came to be known as the DREAM3 challenges: signaling cascade identification, signaling response prediction, gene expression prediction, and the DREAM3 in silico network challenge. The challenges, based on anonymized data sets, tested participants in network inference and prediction of measurements. Forty teams submitted 413 predicted networks and measurement test sets. Overall, a handful of best-performer teams were identified, while a majority of teams made predictions that were equivalent to random. Counterintuitively, combining the predictions of multiple teams (including the weaker teams) can in some cases improve predictive power beyond that of any single method. Conclusions: DREAM provides valuable feedback to practitioners of systems biology modeling. Lessons learned from the predictions of the community provide much-needed context for interpreting claims of efficacy of algorithms described in the scientific literature.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherPublic Library of Scienceen_US
dc.relation.isversionofdoi:10.1371/journal.pone.0009202en_US
dc.relation.hasversionhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2826397/pdf/en_US
dash.licenseLAA
dc.subjectcomputational biologyen_US
dc.subjectbiochemistryen_US
dc.subjectbioinformaticsen_US
dc.subjectbiophysicsen_US
dc.subjecttheory and simulationen_US
dc.titleTowards a Rigorous Assessment of Systems Biology Models: The DREAM3 Challengesen_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.description.versionVersion of Recorden_US
dc.relation.journalPLoS ONEen_US
dash.depositing.authorSorger, Peter Karl
dc.date.available2012-01-14T22:12:09Z
dash.affiliation.otherHMS^Systems Biologyen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0009202*
dash.contributor.affiliatedSorger, Peter


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record