Literature DB >> 26150892

Pareto optimization in algebraic dynamic programming.

Cédric Saule1, Robert Giegerich1.   

Abstract

Pareto optimization combines independent objectives by computing the Pareto front of its search space, defined as the set of all solutions for which no other candidate solution scores better under all objectives. This gives, in a precise sense, better information than an artificial amalgamation of different scores into a single objective, but is more costly to compute. Pareto optimization naturally occurs with genetic algorithms, albeit in a heuristic fashion. Non-heuristic Pareto optimization so far has been used only with a few applications in bioinformatics. We study exact Pareto optimization for two objectives in a dynamic programming framework. We define a binary Pareto product operator [Formula: see text] on arbitrary scoring schemes. Independent of a particular algorithm, we prove that for two scoring schemes A and B used in dynamic programming, the scoring scheme [Formula: see text] correctly performs Pareto optimization over the same search space. We study different implementations of the Pareto operator with respect to their asymptotic and empirical efficiency. Without artificial amalgamation of objectives, and with no heuristics involved, Pareto optimization is faster than computing the same number of answers separately for each objective. For RNA structure prediction under the minimum free energy versus the maximum expected accuracy model, we show that the empirical size of the Pareto front remains within reasonable bounds. Pareto optimization lends itself to the comparative investigation of the behavior of two alternative scoring schemes for the same purpose. For the above scoring schemes, we observe that the Pareto front can be seen as a composition of a few macrostates, each consisting of several microstates that differ in the same limited way. We also study the relationship between abstract shape analysis and the Pareto front, and find that they extract information of a different nature from the folding space and can be meaningfully combined.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Algebraic dynamic programming; Dynamic programming; Pareto optimization; RNA structure; Sankoff algorithm

Year:  2015        PMID: 26150892      PMCID: PMC4491898          DOI: 10.1186/s13015-015-0051-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Algorithms Mol Biol        ISSN: 1748-7188            Impact factor:   1.405


  23 in total

1.  RNA movies: visualizing RNA secondary structure spaces.

Authors:  D Evers; R Giegerich
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 6.937

2.  Alignment of RNA base pairing probability matrices.

Authors:  Ivo L Hofacker; Stephan H F Bernhart; Peter F Stadler
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2004-04-08       Impact factor: 6.937

3.  Predicting a set of minimal free energy RNA secondary structures common to two sequences.

Authors:  David H Mathews
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2005-02-24       Impact factor: 6.937

4.  Multiclass gene selection using Pareto-fronts.

Authors:  Jagath C Rajapakse; Piyushkumar A Mundra
Journal:  IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform       Date:  2013 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.710

5.  On quantitative effects of RNA shape abstraction.

Authors:  Markus E Nebel; Anika Scheid
Journal:  Theory Biosci       Date:  2009-09-15       Impact factor: 1.919

6.  Structural RNA alignment by multi-objective optimization.

Authors:  Thomas Schnattinger; Uwe Schöning; Hans A Kestler
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2013-04-24       Impact factor: 6.937

7.  An improved algorithm for matching biological sequences.

Authors:  O Gotoh
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1982-12-15       Impact factor: 5.469

8.  Versatile and declarative dynamic programming using pair algebras.

Authors:  Peter Steffen; Robert Giegerich
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2005-09-12       Impact factor: 3.169

9.  Rfam 11.0: 10 years of RNA families.

Authors:  Sarah W Burge; Jennifer Daub; Ruth Eberhardt; John Tate; Lars Barquist; Eric P Nawrocki; Sean R Eddy; Paul P Gardner; Alex Bateman
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2012-11-03       Impact factor: 16.971

10.  The four ingredients of single-sequence RNA secondary structure prediction. A unifying perspective.

Authors:  Elena Rivas
Journal:  RNA Biol       Date:  2013-05-10       Impact factor: 4.652

View more
  2 in total

1.  Bi-objective integer programming for RNA secondary structure prediction with pseudoknots.

Authors:  Audrey Legendre; Eric Angel; Fariza Tahi
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2018-01-15       Impact factor: 3.169

2.  Epilepsy: A Call for Help.

Authors:  Venkatraman Sadanand
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2018-01-28
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.