Comparison of visualization methods for an atlas of gene expression data sets

Information Visualization

Volumn 6, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 139-154

  Venna, Jarkko ^a   Kaski, Samuel ^a,b  

^a HELSINKI INSTITUTE FOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY   (Finland)

^b AALTO UNIVERSITY   (Finland)

Author keywords

Gene expression; Manifold extraction; Nonlinear dimensionalityr eduction; Visualization

Indexed keywords

DATA REDUCTION; DATABASE SYSTEMS; EMBEDDED SYSTEMS; GENE EXPRESSION; INTERFACES (COMPUTER);

DATA SETS; DIMENSIONALITY REDUCTION METHODS; MANIFOLD EXTRACTION; NONLINEAR DIMENSIONALITYR EDUCTION;

DATA STRUCTURES;

EID: 34547288347     PISSN: 14738716     EISSN: 14738724     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.ivs.9500153     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Hotelling H. Analysis of a complex of statistical variables into principal components. Journal of Educational Psychology 1933; 24: 417-441, 498-520.
2. Borg I, Groenen P. Modern Multidimensional Scaling. Springer: New York, 1997.
3. Kaski S, Nikkilä J, Oja M, Venna J, Törönen P, Castrén E. Trustworthiness and metrics in visualizing similarity of gene expression. BMC Bioinformatics 2003; 4: 48.
4. Kohonen T. Self-Organizing Maps, 3rd ed. Springer: Berlin, 2001.
5. Himberg J. From insights to innovations: data mining, visualization, and user interfaces. PhD thesis, Helsinki University of Technology, Espoo, Finland, 2004.
6. Demartines P, Hérault J. Curvilinear component analysis: a self-organizing neural network for nonlinear mapping of data sets. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks 1997; 8: 148-154.
7. Segal E, Friedman N, Koller D, Regev A. A module map showing conditional activity of expression modules in cancer. Nature Genetics 2004; 36: 1090-1098.
8. Torgerson WS. Multidimensional scaling: I. Theory and method. Psychometrika 1952; 17: 401-419.
9. Gower JC. Some distance properties of latent root and vector methods used in multivariate analysis. Biometrika 1966; 53: 325-338.
10. Sammon Jr. JW. A nonlinear mapping for data structure analysis. IEEE Transactions on Computers 1969; C-18: 401-409.
11. Kruskal JB. Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis. Psychometrica 1964; 29: 1-26.
12. Tenenbaum JB, de Silva V, Langford JC. A global geometric framework for nonlinear dimensionality reduction. Science 2000; 290: 2319-2323.
13. Bernstein M, de Silva V, Langford JC, Tenenbaum JB. Graph approximations to geodesies on embedded manifolds. Technical report, Department of Psychology, Stanford University, 2000.
14. Roweis ST, Saul LK. Nonlinear dimensionality reduction by locally linear embedding. Science 2000; 290: 2323-2326.
15. Belkin M, Niyogi P. Laplacian eigenmaps and spectral techniques for embedding and clustering. In: Dietterich TG, Becker S, Ghahramani Z (Eds). Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 14, MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 2001.
16. Belkin M, Niyogi P. Laplacian eigenmaps for dimensionality reduction and data representation. Technical Report TR-2002-01, Department of Computer Science, The University of Chicago, 2002.
17. Ham J, Lee DD, Mika S, Schölkopf B. A kernel view of the dimensionality reduction of manifolds. Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML 2004), ACM: New York, 2004.
18. Venna J, Kaski S. Neighborhood preservation in nonlinear projection methods: an experimental study. Dorffner G, Bischof H and Hornik K (Eds). Proceedings of ICANN 2001, International Conference on Artificial Neural Networks, Springer: Berlin, 2001; 485-491.
19. Jihoon K, Hee-Joon C, Chan Hee P, Woong-Yang P, Ju Han K. Chromoviz: multimodal visualization of gene expression data onto chromosomes using scalable vector graphics. Bioinformatics 2004; 20: 1191-1192.
20. Culhane AC, Perriére G, Higgins DG. Cross-platform comparison and visualization of gene expression data using co-inertia analysis. BMC Bioinformatics 2003; 4: 59.
21. Ahlberg C, Williamson C, Shnelderman B. Dynamic queries for information exploration: an implementation and evaluation. Proceedings of the ACM CHI '92 Conference, 1992; 619-626.
22. Mecham BH, Klus GT, Strovel J, Augustus M, Byrne D, Bozso P, Wetmore DZ, Mariani TJ, Kohane IS, Szallasi Z. Sequence-matched probes produce increased cross-platform consistency and more reproducible biological results in mlcroarray-based gene expression measurements. Nucleic Acids Research 2004; 32: e74.
23. Hwang K-B, Kong SW, Greenberg SA, Park PJ. Combining gene expression data from different generations of oligonucleotide arrays. BMC Bioinformatics 2004; 5: 159.
24. Irizarry RA, Warren D, Spencer F, Kim IF, Biswal S, Frank BC, Gabrielson E, Garcia JGN, Geoghegan J, Germino G, Griffin C, Hilmer SC, Hoffman E, Jedlicka AE, Kawasaki E, Martínez-Murillo F, Morsberger L, Lee H, Petersen D, Quackenbush J, Scott A, Wilson M, Yang Y, Qing Ye S, Yu W. Multiple-laboratory comparison of microarray platforms. Nature Methods 2005; 2: 345-350.
25. Donoho DL, Grimes C. Hessian eigenmaps: locally linear embedding techniques for high-dimensional data. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2003; 100: 5591-5596.
26. Verbeek JJ, Roweis ST, Vlassis N. Non-linear CCA and PCA by alignment of local models. Thrun S, Saul L, Schölkopf B. (Eds). Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 16. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 2004; 297-304.