In 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 stateof-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.

No abstract

The early stages of the drug design process involve identifying compounds with suitable bioactivities via noisy assays. As databases of possible drugs are often very large, assays can only be performed on a subset of the candidates. Selecting which assays to perform is best done within an active learning process, such as batched Bayesian optimization, and aims to reduce the number of assays that must be performed. We compare how noise affects different batched Bayesian optimization techniques and introduce a retest policy to mitigate the effect of noise. Our experiments show that batched Bayesian optimization remains effective, even when large amounts of noise are present, and that the retest policy enables more active compounds to be identified in the same number of experiments.

The importance of machine learning (ML) to science is now widely recognized. For example, Nature in its last editorial of the last decade named ML as the 'breakthrough' of the decade: 'few fields are untouched by the machine-learning revolution, from material science to drug exploration; quantum physics to medicine'. Despite the importance of ML, some basic ML ideas are still poorly understood

Almost all machine learning (ML) is based on representing examples using intrinsic features. When there are multiple related ML problems (tasks), it is possible to transform these features into extrinsic features by first training ML models on other tasks and letting them each make predictions for each example of the new task, yielding a novel representation. We call this transformational ML (TML). TML is very closely related to, and synergistic with, transfer learning, multitask learning, and stacking. TML is applicable to improving any nonlinear ML method. We tested TML using the most important classes of nonlinear ML: random forests, gradient boosting machines, support vector machines, k-nearest neighbors, and neural networks. To ensure the generality and robustness of the evaluation, we utilized thousands of ML problems from three scientific domains: drug design, predicting gene expression, and ML algorithm selection. We found that TML significantly improved the predictive performance of all the ML methods in all the domains (4 to 50% average improvements) and that TML features generally outperformed intrinsic features. Use of TML also enhances scientific understanding through explainable ML. In drug design, we found that TML provided insight into drug target specificity, the relationships between drugs, and the relationships between target proteins. TML leads to an ecosystem-based approach to ML, where new tasks, examples, predictions, and so on synergistically interact to improve performance. To contribute to this ecosystem, all our data, code, and our ∼50,000 ML models have been fully annotated with metadata, linked, and openly published using Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability principles (∼100 Gbytes).