Machine Learning is the study of methods for programming computers to learn. Computers are applied to a wide range of tasks, and for most of these it is relatively easy for programmers to design and implement the necessary software. However, there are many tasks for which this is difficult or impossible. These can be divided into four general categories. First, there are problems for which there exist no human experts. For example, in modern automated manufacturing facilities, there is a need to predict machine failures before they occur by analyzing sensor readings. Because the machines are new, there are no human experts who can be interviewed by a programmer to provide the knowledge necessary to build a computer system. A machine learning system can study recorded data and subsequent machine failures and learn prediction rules. Second, there are problems where human experts exist, but where they are unable to explain their expertise. This is the case in many perceptual tasks, such as speech recognition, hand-writing recognition, and natural language understanding. Virtually all humans exhibit expert-level abilities on these tasks, but none of them can describe the detailed steps that they follow as they perform them. Fortunately, humans can provide machines with examples of the inputs and correct outputs for these tasks, so machine learning algorithms can learn to map the inputs to the outputs. Third, there are problems where phenomena are changing rapidly. In finance, for example, people would like to predict the future behavior of the stock market, of consumer purchases, or of exchange rates. These behaviors change frequently, so that even if a programmer could construct a good predictive computer program, it would need to be rewritten frequently. A learning program can relieve the programmer of this burden by constantly modifying and tuning a set of learned prediction rules. Fourth, there are applications that need to be customized for each computer user separately. Consider, for example, a program to filter unwanted electronic mail messages. Different users will need different filters. It is unreasonable to expect each user to program his or her own rules, and it is infeasible to provide every user with a software engineer to keep the rules up-to-date. A machine learning system can learn which mail messages the user rejects and maintain the filtering rules automatically. Machine learning addresses many of the same research questions as the fields of statistics, data mining, and psychology, but with differences of emphasis. Statistics focuses on understanding the phenomena that have generated the data, often with the goal of testing different hypotheses about those phenomena. Data mining seeks to find patterns in the data that are understandable by people. Psychological studies of human learning aspire to understand the mechanisms underlying the various learning behaviors exhibited by people (concept learning, skill acquisition, strategy change, etc.).

Machine learning

The number of prokaryotic genome sequences becoming available is growing steadily and is growing faster than our ability to accurately annotate them. We describe a fully automated service for annotating bacterial and archaeal genomes. The service identifies protein-encoding, rRNA and tRNA genes, assigns functions to the genes, predicts which subsystems are represented in the genome, uses this information to reconstruct the metabolic network and makes the output easily downloadable for the user. In addition, the annotated genome can be browsed in an environment that supports comparative analysis with the annotated genomes maintained in the SEED environment. The service normally makes the annotated genome available within 12–24 hours of submission, but ultimately the quality of such a service will be judged in terms of accuracy, consistency, and completeness of the produced annotations. We summarize our attempts to address these issues and discuss plans for incrementally enhancing the service. By providing accurate, rapid annotation freely to the community we have created an important community resource. The service has now been utilized by over 120 external users annotating over 350 distinct genomes.

/pdf/the-rast-server-rapid-annotations-using-subsystems-582nx8semt.pdf

The RAST Server: Rapid Annotations using Subsystems Technology

Feature selection techniques have become an apparent need in many bioinformatics applications. In addition to the large pool of techniques that have already been developed in the machine learning and data mining fields, specific applications in bioinformatics have led to a wealth of newly proposed techniques.

In this article, we make the interested reader aware of the possibilities of feature selection, providing a basic taxonomy of feature selection techniques, and discussing their use, variety and potential in a number of both common as well as upcoming bioinformatics applications.

Contact: yvan.saeys@psb.ugent.be

Supplementary information: http://bioinformatics.psb.ugent.be/supplementary_data/yvsae/fsreview

A review of feature selection techniques in bioinformatics

We have produced a draft sequence of the rice genome for the most widely cultivated subspecies in China, Oryza sativa L. ssp. indica, by whole-genome shotgun sequencing. The genome was 466 megabases in size, with an estimated 46,022 to 55,615 genes. Functional coverage in the assembled sequences was 92.0%. About 42.2% of the genome was in exact 20-nucleotide oligomer repeats, and most of the transposons were in the intergenic regions between genes. Although 80.6% of predicted Arabidopsis thaliana genes had a homolog in rice, only 49.4% of predicted rice genes had a homolog in A. thaliana. The large proportion of rice genes with no recognizable homologs is due to a gradient in the GC-content of rice coding sequences.

/pdf/a-draft-sequence-of-the-rice-genome-oryza-sativa-l-ssp-5212kgt1ff.pdf

A draft sequence of the rice genome (Oryza sativa L. ssp indica)

Recent technological advances have opened unprecedented opportunities for large-scale sequencing and analysis of populations of pathogenic species in disease outbreaks, as well as for large-scale diversity studies aimed at expanding our knowledge across the whole domain of prokaryotes. To meet the challenge of timely interpretation of structure, function and meaning of this vast genetic information, a comprehensive approach to automatic genome annotation is critically needed. In collaboration with Georgia Tech, NCBI has developed a new approach to genome annotation that combines alignment based methods with methods of predicting protein-coding and RNA genes and other functional elements directly from sequence. A new gene finding tool, GeneMarkS+, uses the combined evidence of protein and RNA placement by homology as an initial map of annotation to generate and modify ab initio gene predictions across the whole genome. Thus, the new NCBI's Prokaryotic Genome Annotation Pipeline (PGAP) relies more on sequence similarity when confident comparative data are available, while it relies more on statistical predictions in the absence of external evidence. The pipeline provides a framework for generation and analysis of annotation on the full breadth of prokaryotic taxonomy. For additional information on PGAP see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genome/annotation_prok/ and the NCBI Handbook, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK174280/.

/pdf/ncbi-prokaryotic-genome-annotation-pipeline-2xblaudom9.pdf

NCBI prokaryotic genome annotation pipeline

The GLIMMER system for microbial gene identification finds approximately 97-98% of all genes in a genome when compared with published annotation. This paper reports on two new results: (i) significant technical improvements to GLIMMER that improve its accuracy still further, and (ii) a comprehensive evaluation that demonstrates that the accuracy of the system is likely to be higher than previously recognized. A significant proportion of the genes missed by the system appear to be hypothetical proteins whose existence is only supported by the predictions of other programs. When the analysis is restricted to genes that have significant homology to genes in other organisms, GLIMMER misses <1% of known genes.

/pdf/improved-microbial-gene-identification-with-glimmer-4tpa9gvxoo.pdf

Douglas Harmon

Papers

Improved microbial gene identification with GLIMMER