Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Sergey B. Stepaniants
dblp:25/82
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2006
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 2
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
2 papers |
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 67% Computational science and engineering · 33% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Computational science and engineering
error model |
0.1 | 1 | 2006 | Rosetta error model for gene expression analysis · Bioinform. 2006 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › gene expression analysis › microarray data analysis
microarray gene expression analysis |
0.1 | 1 | 2006 | Rosetta error model for gene expression analysis · Bioinform. 2006 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › gene expression analysis
microarray data analysis |
0.0 | 1 | 2003 | Microarray Standard Data Set and Figures of Merit for Comparing Data Processing Methods and Experiment Designs · Bioinform. 2003 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › gene expression analysis
differential expression analysis |
0.0 | 1 | 2003 | Microarray Standard Data Set and Figures of Merit for Comparing Data Processing Methods and Experiment Designs · Bioinform. 2003 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology
gene expression analysis |
0.0 | 1 | 2003 | Microarray Standard Data Set and Figures of Merit for Comparing Data Processing Methods and Experiment Designs · Bioinform. 2003 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
variance stabilization · 0.1error model · 0.1statistical analysis · 0.0normalization · 0.0image processing · 0.0error modeling · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 | Rosetta error model for gene expression analysisabstractAbstract Motivation: In microarray gene expression studies, the number of replicated microarrays is usually small because of cost and sample availability, resulting in unreliable variance estimation and thus unreliable statistical hypothesis tests. The unreliable variance estimation is further complicated by the fact that the technology-specific variance is intrinsically intensity-dependent. Results: The Rosetta error model captures the variance-intensity relationship for various types of microarray technologies, such as single-color arrays and two-color arrays. This error model conservatively estimates intensity error and uses this value to stabilize the variance estimation. We present two commonly used error models: the intensity error-model for single-color microarrays and the ratio error model for two-color microarrays or ratios built from two single-color arrays. We present examples to demonstrate the strength of our error models in improving statistical power of microarray data analysis, particularly, in increasing expression detection sensitivity and specificity when the number of replicates is limited. Availability: Rosetta error models are available in the Rosetta Resolver® system for gene expression analysis. These technology-specific error models are designed and optimized for different microarray technologies, such as Affymetrix® and Agilent Technologies. Contact: [email protected] Supplementary information: Supplementary data and Appendices are available at Bioinformatics online. Lee Weng, Hongyue Dai, Yihui Zhan, Yudong D. He, Sergey B. Stepaniants, Douglas E. Bassett |
Bioinform. | 5 |
| 2003 | Microarray Standard Data Set and Figures of Merit for Comparing Data Processing Methods and Experiment DesignsabstractMOTIVATION: There is a very large and growing level of effort toward improving the platforms, experiment designs, and data analysis methods for microarray expression profiling. Along with a growing richness in the approaches there is a growing confusion among most scientists as to how to make objective comparisons and choices between them for different applications. There is a need for a standard framework for the microarray community to compare and improve analytical and statistical methods. RESULTS: We report on a microarray data set comprising 204 in-situ synthesized oligonucleotide arrays, each hybridized with two-color cDNA samples derived from 20 different human tissues and cell lines. Design of the approximately 24 000 60mer oligonucleotides that report approximately 2500 known genes on the arrays, and design of the hybridization experiments, were carried out in a way that supports the performance assessment of alternative data processing approaches and of alternative experiment and array designs. We also propose standard figures of merit for success in detecting individual differential expression changes or expression levels, and for detecting similarities and differences in expression patterns across genes and experiments. We expect this data set and the proposed figures of merit will provide a standard framework for much of the microarray community to compare and improve many analytical and statistical methods relevant to microarray data analysis, including image processing, normalization, error modeling, combining of multiple reporters per gene, use of replicate experiments, and sample referencing schemes in measurements based on expression change. AVAILABILITY/SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Expression data and supplementary information are available at http://www.rii.com/publications/2003/HE_SDS.htm Yudong D. He, Hongyue Dai, Eric E. Schadt, Guy Cavet, Stephen W. Edwards, Sergey B. Stepaniants, Sven Duenwald, Robert Kleinhanz, Allan R. Jones, Daniel D. Shoemaker, Roland B. Stoughton |
Bioinform. | 6 |