Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Piotr Pokarowski

dblp:90/2842 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
6ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2015
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Theory of computation · 3Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 2Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author

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%
Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Mathematical optimization · 100%
Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Learning theory · 100%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Bioinformatics and computational biology › epigenomics
DNA methylation
0.212015
A cautionary note on using binary calls for analysis of DNA methylation · Bioinform. 2015
Bioinformatics and computational biology › epigenomics › DNA methylation
DNA methylation analysis
0.212015
A cautionary note on using binary calls for analysis of DNA methylation · Bioinform. 2015
Bioinformatics and computational biology
epigenomics
0.212015
A cautionary note on using binary calls for analysis of DNA methylation · Bioinform. 2015
Mathematical optimization › least squares
regularized least squares
0.212015
Combined l1 and greedy l0 penalized least squares for linear model selection · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2015
Machine learning › Learning theory › high-dimensional regression
sparse regression
0.112015
Combined l1 and greedy l0 penalized least squares for linear model selection · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2015

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

l1 penalty · 0.4greedy l0 penalty · 0.4binary calling · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2015 A cautionary note on using binary calls for analysis of DNA methylation
abstract
Agnieszka Prochenka, Piotr Pokarowski, Piotr Gasperowicz, Joanna Kosinska, Piotr Stawinski, Renata Zbiec-Piekarska, Magdalena Spólnicka, Wojciech Branicki, Rafal Ploski
Bioinform.2
2015 Combined l1 and greedy l0 penalized least squares for linear model selection
Piotr Pokarowski, Jan Mielniczuk
J. Mach. Learn. Res.1
2013 Optimal Monte Carlo integration with fixed relative precision
Leslaw Gajek, Wojciech Niemiro, Piotr Pokarowski
J. Complex.3
2010 Probe set filtering increases correlation between Affymetrix GeneChip and qRT-PCR expression measurements
abstract
BACKGROUND: Affymetrix GeneChip microarrays are popular platforms for expression profiling in two types of studies: detection of differential expression computed by p-values of t-test and estimation of fold change between analyzed groups. There are many different preprocessing algorithms for summarizing Affymetrix data. The main goal of these methods is to remove effects of non-specific hybridization, and to optimally combine information from multiple probes annotated to the same transcript. The methods are benchmarked by comparison with reference methods, such as quantitative reverse-transcription PCR (qRT-PCR). RESULTS: We present a comprehensive analysis of agreement between Affymetrix GeneChip and qRT-PCR results. We analyzed the influence of filtering by fraction Present calls introduced by J.N. McClintick and H.J. Edenberg (2006) and 2 mapping procedures: updated probe sets definitions proposed by Dai et al. (2005) and our "naive mapping" method. Because of evolution of genome sequence annotations since the time when microarrays were designed, we also studied the effect of the annotation release date. These comparisons were prepared for 6 popular preprocessing algorithms (MAS5, PLIER, RMA, GC-RMA, MBEI, and MBEImm) in the 2 above-mentioned types of studies. We used data sets from 6 independent biological experiments. As a measure of reproducibility of microarray and qRT-PCR values, we used linear and rank correlation coefficients. CONCLUSIONS: We show that filtering by fraction Present calls increased correlations for all 6 preprocessing algorithms. We observed the difference in performance of PM-MM and PM-only methods: using MM probes increased correlations in fold change studies, but PM-only methods proved to perform better in detection of differential expression. We recommend using GC-RMA for detection of differential expression and PLIER for estimation of fold change. The use of the more recent annotation improves the results in both types of studies, encouraging re-analysis of old data.
Jakub Mieczkowski, Magdalena E. Tyburczy, Michal Dabrowski, Piotr Pokarowski
BMC Bioinform.4
2001 A New Combinatorial Algorithm for Large Markov Chains (Extended Abstract)
Anna Gambin, Piotr Pokarowski
CASC2
2001 A Combinatorial Aggregation Algorithm for Stationary Distribution of a Large Markov Chain
Anna Gambin, Piotr Pokarowski
FCT2