pre-icm int. convention , 2008
DESCRIPTION
A Bayesian decision theoretic solution to the problem related to microarray data with consideration of intra-correlation among the affected genes. By Naveen K. Bansal Marquette University Milwaukee, Wisconsin(USA) Email: [email protected] http://www.mscs.mu.edu/~naveen/ With - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
ByNaveen K. Bansal
Marquette UniversityMilwaukee, Wisconsin(USA)
Email: [email protected]://www.mscs.mu.edu/~naveen/
WithDr. Klaus Miescke
University of Illinois-ChicagoIllinois (USA)
A Bayesian decision theoretic solution to the problem related to microarray data with consideration of intra-correlation among the affected genes
When the genes are altered under adverse condition, such as cancer, the affected genes show under or over expression in a microarray.
0:0:0:
),(~
110
ii
ii
ii
ii
i
HorHvsH
PX
Level ExpressionX
The objective is to find the genes with under expressions and genes with over expressions.
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
0:2,0:1)0,(0:0
),P( :Modely Probabilit
HHvssayH
Directional Error (Type III error):
Sarkar and Zhou (2008, JSPI)Finner ( 1999, AS)Shaffer (2002, Psychological Methods)Lehmann (1952, AMS; 1957, AMS)
Main points of these work is that if the objective is to find the true Direction of the alternative after rejecting the null, then a Type III error must be controlled instead of Type I error.
Type III error is defined as P( false directional error if the null is rejected). The traditional method does not control the directional error. For example,
0. if occurserror an , and ,|| 2/2/ tttt
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
.action gfor takin loss),(},1,0,1{
)(0,in containedsupport ith density w)(
,0)(-in containedsupport ith density w)(
)0()(),0()(),0()()(
where
)()()()(
:,:,)0,(:
),P( :Modely Probabilit
1
1
1011-
110011
020100
AaaLA
g
g
IgIIg
ppp
HHsayH
Bayesian Decision Theoretic Framework
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
important. more is tail whaton based assigned be can p and p
test. tail-two a yield ulddensity wo symmetrica of truncated as g and g withpp
test. tail-one a yield would0)p (or p
tail. left the thanlikely more is tail right the that reflects pp
pp1-(pby introduced is prior the in skewnessThe
. ondensity a of densities trucated be could 1g and g
11-
11-1-
11-
1
11
0
).1,0,
1
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
genes. expressed over and genes ssedunderexpre among ncorrelatio
introduces and on prior A
. and parameters the on depending g and g withpriors themodify can wegenes, expressed over and
expressed under among ncorrelatio the introduce To
1-
)|()|(
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
same theare ),0( for which rules all of class theconsider
}:))(),0(),({()S(
space thecomparingby compared becan rulesdecision ,prior fixed aFor
),0()0(
)(),()(
)(),()( where
)()0()()(
bygiven is ruledecision afor risk Bayes The
*11011
0
0 111
0 111
11100111
R
Drrr
Rr
dRr
dRr
rprprpr
BayesRule
)(1 r
)(1 r11 and on
depends slopepp
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
direction. negative in therisk averagehan smaller t be willdirection positive in the
rule Bayes theofrisk average e then th),( an likely th more is t known tha isit apriori if that implies theoremThis:
)'()( and
)'()(
thenly,respective ' and under rules Bayes theare and if and , If :1
)' tocomparisonin under likelely more is (i.e.
)()()()('
),()()()(
priors twofollowing heConsider t
11'1
1
11
11
'BB
'11
1'11
2'1001
'1-
110011-
'
'
ppHH
rr
rr
pp
Hpp
ppp
ppp
BB
BB
Remark
Theorem
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
An Application:
An experiment was conducted to see the effect of a sequence knockdown from non-coding genes. Hypothesis was that this knockdown will cause the overexpression of the mRNAs of the coding genes. The implication of this is that this will shows how the non-coding genes interact with coding genes. In other words, non-coding genes also play a part in protein synthesis.
Here it can be assumed that that the effect of knockdown on the coding genes (if there is any) would be mostly overexpression of mRNAs than underexpression of mRNAs. The objective would be to detect as many of overexpressed genes as possible.
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
Relationship with the False Discovery Rates
s.discoverie
false theseof average weighted theis )( rate.dicovery -non false expected as )(
and rate,discovery positive-non false expected as dinterprete becan )(Similarly
framwork.Bayesian in the ratediscovery negative-non false expected iswhich
)]0|0([)()0()(
0)0(
0)0(
0)0(
),(
01
00)1,(
01
00)0,(
01
0 0 ,-1)(
loss 1"-"0 heConsider t
0
1
011
BB
B
B
rr
r
PEdPr
P
P
P
R
LLL
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
rule Bayes randomized-non}1,0,1{
tindependen ,...,2,1),(11)(00)(11~
0:1,0:1,0:0
:problem hypotheses multiple following heConsider t
,...,2,1),,;(~i
withdatat independen },...,2,1,{
iB
Nipppi
iiHi
iHiiH
Niiif
NIi
xX
X
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
Accept Accept Accept Total
is true
is true
is true
Total
U 1V 2V 0m
1H1T 1S 2W 1m
1H2T 1W 2S 2m
0R1R 2R
0H 1H 1H
0H
Table 1Possible outcomes from hypothesis tests
m
m
)2003,(]0|[]0|[
][][
22
2211
1
111
2
221
1
111
ASStoreyRR
WVEpFDRR
R
WVEpFDR
R
WVEFDR
R
WVEFDR
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
)1|1()1|0()(1
)1|1()1|0()(1
then trials,l trinomiaidentical
andt independen are ,...,2,1),1,0,1( If ly.respective 1
and 0,1 wrt of onsdistributi marginal theare 1,0,1
where,1)1(0)0(1)1(~| that Assume
.,...,2,1each for ly,respective ,1 and 1 accepting of
regions thebe 1 and 1Let .,...,2,1 statisticson test based are testshypothesis that Suppose :
THPTHPpFDR
and
THPTHPpFDR
miiHiHiHiTFFF
FiHIFiHIFiHIiidiHiT
miiHiH
mTTTm
2 Theorem
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
This theorem and our previous discussion on the Bayes decision rule implies that under the independent hypotheses testing setting, the Bayes rule obtained from a single test problem
Which minimizes the average expected false discoveries, can be used under multiple hypotheses problem. The false discovery rates of this procedure can be obtained by computing the posterior probabilities.
,0:1,0:1 vs.0:0 HHH
)1|1()1|0()(1
)1|1()1|0()(1
BHPBHPBpFDR
BHPBHPBpFDR
The prior probabilities will determine whether the positive hypothesis or the negative hypothesiswill be more frequently correctly detected.
1 and 1 pp1H 1H
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
Posterior False Discovery Rate
m
ii
m
iii
m
ii
m
iii
dI
dIP
dI
dIIEPFDR
1
1
1
11
1)1(
)1()|0(
|1)1(
)1()0(
X
X
.],)|0,
.],)|0
1
1
11i
1-1-i
E[PFDR then P( ifSimilarly
E[PFDR then P( if Thus
X
X
j
iij
j
iij
mmmm
mmmm
ii
i-i
qj
Qqj
XQ
qqq
qqq
Pq
Pq
Let
11,
11,
,,2,1
,,2,1
11)(
...
...
)|0()(
)|0()(
XX
XX
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
.]]
....
....
0},)(:max{)(
0},)(:max{)(
:3
21
,1
,1
1
1
E[PFDR and E[PFDR Then
qq to ingcorrespond HallSelect
qq to ingcorrespond HallSelect
otherwiseexists maximumifXQjXk
otherwiseexists maximumifXQjXk
Let Theorem
-
mk1,1j
mk1,1j
j
j-
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
Computation of Bayes Rule:
].,1|)1,([ and ],1|)1,([ computing and
)|1( and ),|0(),|1( computing invole partsn Computatio
ly.respective )(1 and )(1under of densities posterior theare
),1|( and ),1|( and ly;respective 1 and ,0,1 of
iesprobabilitposterior theare )|1( and ),|0(),|1( Here
),1|()|1()0()|0(),1|()|1()|(
]}|),([1,0,1
min]|),([:)1,0,1({)(
XX
XXX
XX
XXX
XXXXXX
XX
HLEHLE
HHH
HHHHH
HHH
HHIHHH
jLEj
iLEiB
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
))],(/)0,([log()(
is )( of choice good One null. thefrom departure of magnitude hereflect t )( Here,
.constants negative-non some are 1 and 1,0 where
))(1(1)(1)),(1(1)(1 )),((10)(0
be wouldchoice goodA
.1)(1)(1)(0 loss, 1"-"0 For the
0)(1
00)1,(,0)(
1
00)1,(,
0)(00)0,(
XfXfEq
lll
qlqqlqqlq
qqq
qLqLq
L
Choice of the loss function:
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
)1|(1)()1|(1
if )1(1select Otherwise,
.
0
1)
1|(
)0
|( and
0
1)
1|(
)0
|(
if 0reject ds,other worIn
.under density marginal theis )|( Here
}1,0,1),|(max()|(:{
bygiven is rule Bayes theloss, 1"-"0 he Under t:
loss. 1"-"0 a have then we,1)(1)(1)( If
HfpHfp
HH
p
p
Hf
Hf
p
p
Hf
Hf
H
jHjHf
jjHfjpiHfipiB
qqq
XX
X
X
X
X
XX
XX
3 Theorem
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
ondistributi )1,0( half-right:1
ondistributi )1,0( half-left:1
)(11)0(0)(11)(:Prior
0:1,0:1.0:0
)1,( :Modely Probabilit
:Example
N
N
pIpp
HHvsH
N
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
)1/0(11 and )1/0(1
1
toequivalent isregion rejection theThus ly.respective functions,
increasing and decreasinglly monotonica are 1 and 1 that Note
)1
())1(2
22exp(
1
2)(1
)1
())1(2
22exp(
1
2)(1
where),(11)()(11 if )1(1select otherwise
,1/0)(1 and 1/0)(1
if 0reject rule Bayes theloss, 1"-"0 he Under t:
ppTxppTx
TT
n
nx
n
xn
nxT
andn
nx
n
xn
nxT
xTpxTpHH
ppxTppxT
H
4 Theorem
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
Power Comparison:
line dotted red : testunbiased UMP
line) blue :22.01,39.00,39.01 test withBayes
unbiased. UMPisregion rejection the,11When
ppp
pp
-0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.50
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
mean value
prob
of
reje
ctio
n
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
-0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.50
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
mean value
prob
of
reje
ctio
n
line dotted red : testunbiased UMP
line) blue :39.01,39.00,22.01 test withBayes ppp
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
where),(1)|1()()(1)|1E( if )1(1select otherwise
,)|
1(
)|0
()(1 and
)|1
(
)|0
()(1
if 0reject rule Bayes theloss, 1"-"0 he Under t:5
result. following get the weproblem, normal For the
ly.respective )|1( and ),|0(
),|1(by 1,0,1 replace tobe woulddifferenceonly e that thsee easy to isIt prior.Dirichlet aconsider can One
xTpExTpHH
pE
pExT
pE
pExT
H
XpEXpE
XpEpandpp
XX
X
X
X
X
Theorem
unknown? are 1pand,0p,1p ifWhat
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
Another Approach:
values.in dispersion the and values,in skewness thereflects Here
).0()()(2)('
normal-skew example,for prior; skewed a is )(' where
),(')01()0(0p)(
prior heConsider t
I
pI
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
-0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.50
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
mean value
prob
of
reje
ctio
n
Power Comparison of a skew-normal Bayes with the UMP test
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008
?
Pre-ICM Int. Convention, 2008