Reformulated Kemeny Optimal Aggregation with Application in Consensus Ranking of microRNA Targets

MicroRNAs are very recently discovered small noncoding RNAs, responsible for negative regulation of gene expression. Members of this endogenous family of small RNA molecules have been found implicated in many genetic disorders. Each microRNA targets tens to hundreds of genes. Experimental validation of target genes is a time- and cost-intensive procedure. Therefore, prediction of microRNA targets is a very important problem in computational biology. Though, dozens of target prediction algorithms have been reported in the past decade, they disagree significantly in terms of target gene ranking (based on predicted scores). Rank aggregation is often used to combine multiple target orderings suggested by different algorithms. This technique has been used in diverse fields including social choice theory, meta search in web, and most recently, in bioinformatics. Kemeny optimal aggregation (KOA) is considered the more profound objective for rank aggregation. The consensus ordering obtained through Kemeny optimal aggregation incurs minimum pairwise disagreement with the input orderings. Because of its computational intractability, heuristics are often formulated to obtain a near optimal consensus ranking. Unlike its real time use in meta search, there are a number of scenarios in bioinformatics (e.g., combining microRNA target rankings, combining disease-related gene rankings obtained from microarray experiments) where evolutionary approaches can be afforded with the ambition of better optimization. We conjecture that an ideal consensus ordering should have its total disagreement shared, as equally as possible, with the input orderings. This is also important to refrain the evolutionary processes from getting stuck to local extremes. In the current work, we reformulate Kemeny optimal aggregation while introducing a trade-off between the total pairwise disagreement and its distribution. A simulated annealing-based implementation of the proposed objective has been found effective in context of microRNA target ranking. Supplementary data and source code link are available at: http://www.isical.ac.in/bioinfo_miu/ieee_tcbb_kemeny.rar.

[1]  Peter C. Fishburn,et al.  The paradox of voting: Effects of individual indifference and intransitivity , 1980 .

[2]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[3]  A. Hatzigeorgiou,et al.  A guide through present computational approaches for the identification of mammalian microRNA targets , 2006, Nature Methods.

[4]  Ujjwal Maulik,et al.  Development of the human cancer microRNA network , 2010 .

[5]  GusfieldDan Introduction to the IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics , 2004 .

[6]  H. Young,et al.  A Consistent Extension of Condorcet’s Election Principle , 1978 .

[7]  M. Kamien,et al.  The paradox of voting: probability calculations. , 1968, Behavioral science.

[8]  D. Bartel MicroRNAs Genomics, Biogenesis, Mechanism, and Function , 2004, Cell.

[9]  Sanghamitra Bandyopadhyay,et al.  Participation of microRNAs in human interactome: extraction of microRNA-microRNA regulations. , 2011, Molecular bioSystems.

[10]  Vasyl Pihur,et al.  RankAggreg, an R package for weighted rank aggregation , 2009, BMC Bioinformatics.

[11]  K. Gunsalus,et al.  Combinatorial microRNA target predictions , 2005, Nature Genetics.

[12]  H. Young Condorcet's Theory of Voting , 1988, American Political Science Review.

[13]  Ujjwal Maulik,et al.  Weighted Markov Chain Based Aggregation of Biomolecule Orderings , 2012, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics.

[14]  Michael Kertesz,et al.  The role of site accessibility in microRNA target recognition , 2007, Nature Genetics.

[15]  C. E. SHANNON,et al.  A mathematical theory of communication , 1948, MOCO.

[16]  Anton J. Enright,et al.  Human MicroRNA Targets , 2004, PLoS biology.

[17]  Alfred De Grazia,et al.  Mathematical Derivation of an Election System , 1953 .

[18]  Sven Laur,et al.  Robust rank aggregation for gene list integration and meta-analysis , 2012, Bioinform..

[19]  Jie Ding,et al.  Integration of Ranked Lists via Cross Entropy Monte Carlo with Applications to mRNA and microRNA Studies , 2009, Biometrics.

[20]  R. Giegerich,et al.  Fast and effective prediction of microRNA/target duplexes. , 2004, RNA.

[21]  M. Truchon,et al.  An Extension of the Concordet Criterion and Kemeny Orders , 1998 .

[22]  S. Falcon,et al.  Combining Results of Microarray Experiments: A Rank Aggregation Approach , 2006, Statistical applications in genetics and molecular biology.

[23]  Ruth Etzioni,et al.  Combining Results of Microarray Experiments: A Rank Aggregation Approach , 2006 .

[24]  Ujjwal Maulik,et al.  Entropy steered Kendall's tau measure for a fair Rank Aggregation , 2011, 2011 2nd National Conference on Emerging Trends and Applications in Computer Science.

[25]  C. D. Gelatt,et al.  Optimization by Simulated Annealing , 1983, Science.

[26]  Tongbin Li,et al.  miRecords: an integrated resource for microRNA–target interactions , 2008, Nucleic Acids Res..

[27]  C. Burge,et al.  Prediction of Mammalian MicroRNA Targets , 2003, Cell.

[28]  Sankar K. Pal,et al.  Comparing Scores Intended for Ranking , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[29]  Sanghamitra Bandyopadhyay Simulated annealing using a reversible jump Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm for fuzzy clustering , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[30]  Moni Naor,et al.  Rank aggregation methods for the Web , 2001, WWW '01.