Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Oghenejokpeme I. Orhobor
dblp:225/2483
· DBLP profile ↗
8ranked-venue papers
5as first author
2since 2021 · last 2023
0000-0003-1178-611XORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 7 · 5 first-author · 1 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 4 · 3 first-author · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 1
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Bioinformatics and computational biology › molecular informatics › molecular modeling › molecular docking
docking scoring function |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Protein-ligand binding affinity prediction exploiting sequence constituent homology · Bioinform. 2023 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › molecular property prediction
protein-ligand binding affinity prediction |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Protein-ligand binding affinity prediction exploiting sequence constituent homology · Bioinform. 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
gradient boosting trees · 0.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Protein-ligand binding affinity prediction exploiting sequence constituent homologyabstractMOTIVATION: Molecular docking is a commonly used approach for estimating binding conformations and their resultant binding affinities. Machine learning has been successfully deployed to enhance such affinity estimations. Many methods of varying complexity have been developed making use of some or all the spatial and categorical information available in these structures. The evaluation of such methods has mainly been carried out using datasets from PDBbind. Particularly the Comparative Assessment of Scoring Functions (CASF) 2007, 2013, and 2016 datasets with dedicated test sets. This work demonstrates that only a small number of simple descriptors is necessary to efficiently estimate binding affinity for these complexes without the need to know the exact binding conformation of a ligand. RESULTS: The developed approach of using a small number of ligand and protein descriptors in conjunction with gradient boosting trees demonstrates high performance on the CASF datasets. This includes the commonly used benchmark CASF2016 where it appears to perform better than any other approach. This methodology is also useful for datasets where the spatial relationship between the ligand and protein is unknown as demonstrated using a large ChEMBL-derived dataset. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Code and data uploaded to https://github.com/abbiAR/PLBAffinity. Abbi Abdel-Rehim, Oghenejokpeme I. Orhobor, Hang Lou, Ross D. King |
Bioinform. | 2 |
| 2023 | Imbalanced regression using regressor-classifier ensemblesabstractAbstract We present an extension to the federated ensemble regression using classification algorithm, an ensemble learning algorithm for regression problems which leverages the distribution of the samples in a learning set to achieve improved performance. We evaluated the extension using four classifiers and four regressors, two discretizers, and 119 responses from a wide variety of datasets in different domains. Additionally, we compared our algorithm to two resampling methods aimed at addressing imbalanced datasets. Our results show that the proposed extension is highly unlikely to perform worse than the base case, and on average outperforms the two resampling methods with significant differences in performance. Oghenejokpeme I. Orhobor, Nastasiya F. Grinberg, Larisa N. Soldatova, Ross D. King |
Mach. Learn. | 1 |
| 2020 | Generating Explainable and Effective Data Descriptors Using Relational Learning: Application to Cancer BiologyabstractAbstract The key to success in machine learning is the use of effective data representations. The success of deep neural networks (DNNs) is based on their ability to utilize multiple neural network layers, and big data, to learn how to convert simple input representations into richer internal representations that are effective for learning. However, these internal representations are sub-symbolic and difficult to explain. In many scientific problems explainable models are required, and the input data is semantically complex and unsuitable for DNNs. This is true in the fundamental problem of understanding the mechanism of cancer drugs, which requires complex background knowledge about the functions of genes/proteins, their cells, and the molecular structure of the drugs. This background knowledge cannot be compactly expressed propositionally, and requires at least the expressive power of Datalog. Here we demonstrate the use of relational learning to generate new data descriptors in such semantically complex background knowledge. These new descriptors are effective: adding them to standard propositional learning methods significantly improves prediction accuracy. They are also explainable, and add to our understanding of cancer. Our approach can readily be expanded to include other complex forms of background knowledge, and combines the generality of relational learning with the efficiency of standard propositional learning. Oghenejokpeme I. Orhobor, Joseph French, Larisa N. Soldatova, Ross D. King |
DS | 1 |
| 2020 | Federated Ensemble Regression Using ClassificationabstractAbstract Ensemble learning has been shown to significantly improve predictive accuracy in a variety of machine learning problems. For a given predictive task, the goal of ensemble learning is to improve predictive accuracy by combining the predictive power of multiple models. In this paper, we present an ensemble learning algorithm for regression problems which leverages the distribution of the samples in a learning set to achieve improved performance. We apply the proposed algorithm to a problem in precision medicine where the goal is to predict drug perturbation effects on genes in cancer cell lines. The proposed approach significantly outperforms the base case. Oghenejokpeme I. Orhobor, Larisa N. Soldatova, Ross D. King |
DS | 1 |
| 2020 | An evaluation of machine-learning for predicting phenotype: studies in yeast, rice, and wheatabstractIn phenotype prediction the physical characteristics of an organism are predicted from knowledge of its genotype and environment. Such studies, often called genome-wide association studies, are of the highest societal importance, as they are of central importance to medicine, crop-breeding, etc. We investigated three phenotype prediction problems: one simple and clean (yeast), and the other two complex and real-world (rice and wheat). We compared standard machine learning methods; elastic net, ridge regression, lasso regression, random forest, gradient boosting machines (GBM), and support vector machines (SVM), with two state-of-the-art classical statistical genetics methods; genomic BLUP and a two-step sequential method based on linear regression. Additionally, using the clean yeast data, we investigated how performance varied with the complexity of the biological mechanism, the amount of observational noise, the number of examples, the amount of missing data, and the use of different data representations. We found that for almost all the phenotypes considered, standard machine learning methods outperformed the methods from classical statistical genetics. On the yeast problem, the most successful method was GBM, followed by lasso regression, and the two statistical genetics methods; with greater mechanistic complexity GBM was best, while in simpler cases lasso was superior. In the wheat and rice studies the best two methods were SVM and BLUP. The most robust method in the presence of noise, missing data, etc. was random forests. The classical statistical genetics method of genomic BLUP was found to perform well on problems where there was population structure. This suggests that standard machine learning methods need to be refined to include population structure information when this is present. We conclude that the application of machine learning methods to phenotype prediction problems holds great promise, but that determining which methods is likely to perform well on any given problem is elusive and non-trivial. Nastasiya F. Grinberg, Oghenejokpeme I. Orhobor, Ross D. King |
Mach. Learn. | 2 |
| 2020 | Predicting rice phenotypes with meta and multi-target learningabstractAbstract The features in some machine learning datasets can naturally be divided into groups. This is the case with genomic data, where features can be grouped by chromosome. In many applications it is common for these groupings to be ignored, as interactions may exist between features belonging to different groups. However, including a group that does not influence a response introduces noise when fitting a model, leading to suboptimal predictive accuracy. Here we present two general frameworks for the generation and combination of meta-features when feature groupings are present. Furthermore, we make comparisons to multi-target learning, given that one is typically interested in predicting multiple phenotypes. We evaluated the frameworks and multi-target learning approaches on a genomic rice dataset where the regression task is to predict plant phenotype. Our results demonstrate that there are use cases for both the meta and multi-target approaches, given that overall, they significantly outperform the base case. Oghenejokpeme I. Orhobor, Nickolai N. Alexandrov, Ross D. King |
Mach. Learn. | 1 |
| 2018 | Predicting Rice Phenotypes with Meta-learning
Oghenejokpeme I. Orhobor, Nickolai N. Alexandrov, Ross D. King |
DS | 1 |
| 2018 | Large-Scale Assessment of Deep Relational Machines
Tirtharaj Dash, Ashwin Srinivasan 0001, Lovekesh Vig, Oghenejokpeme I. Orhobor, Ross D. King |
ILP | 4 |