Neural networks for link prediction in realistic biomedical graphs: a multi-dimensional evaluation of graph embedding-based approaches

BackgroundLink prediction in biomedical graphs has several important applications including predicting Drug-Target Interactions (DTI), Protein-Protein Interaction (PPI) prediction and Literature-Based Discovery (LBD). It can be done using a classifier to output the probability of link formation between nodes. Recently several works have used neural networks to create node representations which allow rich inputs to neural classifiers. Preliminary works were done on this and report promising results. However they did not use realistic settings like time-slicing, evaluate performances with comprehensive metrics or explain when or why neural network methods outperform. We investigated how inputs from four node representation algorithms affect performance of a neural link predictor on random- and time-sliced biomedical graphs of real-world sizes (∼ 6 million edges) containing information relevant to DTI, PPI and LBD. We compared the performance of the neural link predictor to those of established baselines and report performance across five metrics.ResultsIn random- and time-sliced experiments when the neural network methods were able to learn good node representations and there was a negligible amount of disconnected nodes, those approaches outperformed the baselines. In the smallest graph (∼ 15,000 edges) and in larger graphs with approximately 14% disconnected nodes, baselines such as Common Neighbours proved a justifiable choice for link prediction. At low recall levels (∼ 0.3) the approaches were mostly equal, but at higher recall levels across all nodes and average performance at individual nodes, neural network approaches were superior. Analysis showed that neural network methods performed well on links between nodes with no previous common neighbours; potentially the most interesting links. Additionally, while neural network methods benefit from large amounts of data, they require considerable amounts of computational resources to utilise them.ConclusionsOur results indicate that when there is enough data for the neural network methods to use and there are a negligible amount of disconnected nodes, those approaches outperform the baselines. At low recall levels the approaches are mostly equal but at higher recall levels and average performance at individual nodes, neural network approaches are superior. Performance at nodes without common neighbours which indicate more unexpected and perhaps more useful links account for this.

[1]  Eu-Gene Siew,et al.  Predicting Future Links Between Disjoint Research Areas Using Heterogeneous Bibliographic Information Network , 2015, PAKDD.

[2]  Mark Stevenson,et al.  Exploring relation types for literature-based discovery , 2015, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[3]  Mike Tyers,et al.  BioGRID: a general repository for interaction datasets , 2005, Nucleic Acids Res..

[4]  Wenwu Zhu,et al.  Structural Deep Network Embedding , 2016, KDD.

[5]  Céline Rouveirol,et al.  Supervised Machine Learning Applied to Link Prediction in Bipartite Social Networks , 2010, 2010 International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining.

[6]  Palash Goyal,et al.  Graph Embedding Techniques, Applications, and Performance: A Survey , 2017, Knowl. Based Syst..

[7]  Zhiyong Lu,et al.  PubTator: a web-based text mining tool for assisting biocuration , 2013, Nucleic Acids Res..

[8]  Yuhao Wang,et al.  Predicting drug-target interactions using restricted Boltzmann machines , 2013, Bioinform..

[9]  Mingzhe Wang,et al.  LINE: Large-scale Information Network Embedding , 2015, WWW.

[10]  Jian Pei,et al.  Asymmetric Transitivity Preserving Graph Embedding , 2016, KDD.

[11]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  node2vec: Scalable Feature Learning for Networks , 2016, KDD.

[12]  Olivier Poch,et al.  Controversies in modern evolutionary biology: the imperative for error detection and quality control , 2012, BMC Genomics.

[13]  Jon M. Kleinberg,et al.  The link-prediction problem for social networks , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[14]  Robert B. Russell,et al.  SuperTarget and Matador: resources for exploring drug-target relationships , 2007, Nucleic Acids Res..

[15]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Supervised random walks: predicting and recommending links in social networks , 2010, WSDM '11.

[16]  Steven Skiena,et al.  DeepWalk: online learning of social representations , 2014, KDD.

[17]  Jeffrey Dean,et al.  Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Space , 2013, ICLR.

[18]  Thomas C. Rindflesch,et al.  Link Prediction on a Network of Co-occurring MeSH Terms: Towards Literature-based Discovery , 2016, Methods of Information in Medicine.

[19]  Anna Korhonen,et al.  Link prediction in drug-target interactions network using similarity indices , 2017, BMC Bioinformatics.

[20]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Predicting positive and negative links in online social networks , 2010, WWW '10.

[21]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Rectified Linear Units Improve Restricted Boltzmann Machines , 2010, ICML.

[22]  Evgeniy Gabrilovich,et al.  A Review of Relational Machine Learning for Knowledge Graphs , 2015, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[23]  Gaël Varoquaux,et al.  Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python , 2011, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[24]  Vijay V. Raghavan,et al.  Hypotheses generation as supervised link discovery with automated class labeling on large-scale biomedical concept networks , 2012, BMC Genomics.

[25]  Max Welling,et al.  Modeling Relational Data with Graph Convolutional Networks , 2017, ESWC.

[26]  van den Berg,et al.  UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Modeling Relational Data with Graph Convolutional Networks Modeling Relational Data with Graph Convolutional Networks , 2017 .

[27]  Mohammad Al Hasan,et al.  Link prediction using supervised learning , 2006 .

[28]  Kara Dolinski,et al.  The BioGRID interaction database: 2017 update , 2016, Nucleic Acids Res..

[29]  C E Lipscomb,et al.  Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). , 2000, Bulletin of the Medical Library Association.

[30]  Nitesh V. Chawla,et al.  Evaluating link prediction methods , 2014, Knowledge and Information Systems.

[31]  P. Jaccard,et al.  Etude comparative de la distribution florale dans une portion des Alpes et des Jura , 1901 .

[32]  M. Newman Clustering and preferential attachment in growing networks. , 2001, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[33]  Lada A. Adamic,et al.  Friends and neighbors on the Web , 2003, Soc. Networks.

[34]  Hsinchun Chen,et al.  Link prediction approach to collaborative filtering , 2005, Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL '05).