Using the Pearson's correlation coefficient as the sole metric to measure the accuracy of quantitative trait prediction: is it sufficient?

IF 4.1 2区 生物学 Q1 PLANT SCIENCES Frontiers in Plant Science Pub Date : 2024-12-10 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fpls.2024.1480463
Shouhui Pan, Zhongqiang Liu, Yanyun Han, Dongfeng Zhang, Xiangyu Zhao, Jinlong Li, Kaiyi Wang
{"title":"Using the Pearson's correlation coefficient as the sole metric to measure the accuracy of quantitative trait prediction: is it sufficient?","authors":"Shouhui Pan, Zhongqiang Liu, Yanyun Han, Dongfeng Zhang, Xiangyu Zhao, Jinlong Li, Kaiyi Wang","doi":"10.3389/fpls.2024.1480463","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>How to evaluate the accuracy of quantitative trait prediction is crucial to choose the best model among several possible choices in plant breeding. Pearson's correlation coefficient (PCC), serving as a metric for quantifying the strength of the linear association between two variables, is widely used to evaluate the accuracy of the quantitative trait prediction models, and generally performs well in most circumstances. However, PCC may not always offer a comprehensive view of predictive accuracy, especially in cases involving nonlinear relationships or complex dependencies in machine learning-based methods. It has been found that many papers on quantitative trait prediction solely use PCC as a single metric to evaluate the accuracy of their models, which is insufficient and limited from a formal perspective. This study addresses this crucial issue by presenting a typical example and conducting a comparative analysis of PCC and nine other evaluation metrics using four traditional methods and four machine learning-based methods, thereby contributing to the improvement of practical applicability and reliability of plant quantitative trait prediction models. It is recommended to employ PCC in conjunction with other evaluation metrics in a targeted manner based on specific application scenarios to reduce the likelihood of drawing misleading conclusions.</p>","PeriodicalId":12632,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Plant Science","volume":"15 ","pages":"1480463"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11667204/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Plant Science","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2024.1480463","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PLANT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

How to evaluate the accuracy of quantitative trait prediction is crucial to choose the best model among several possible choices in plant breeding. Pearson's correlation coefficient (PCC), serving as a metric for quantifying the strength of the linear association between two variables, is widely used to evaluate the accuracy of the quantitative trait prediction models, and generally performs well in most circumstances. However, PCC may not always offer a comprehensive view of predictive accuracy, especially in cases involving nonlinear relationships or complex dependencies in machine learning-based methods. It has been found that many papers on quantitative trait prediction solely use PCC as a single metric to evaluate the accuracy of their models, which is insufficient and limited from a formal perspective. This study addresses this crucial issue by presenting a typical example and conducting a comparative analysis of PCC and nine other evaluation metrics using four traditional methods and four machine learning-based methods, thereby contributing to the improvement of practical applicability and reliability of plant quantitative trait prediction models. It is recommended to employ PCC in conjunction with other evaluation metrics in a targeted manner based on specific application scenarios to reduce the likelihood of drawing misleading conclusions.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用皮尔逊相关系数作为衡量定量性状预测准确性的唯一指标:是否足够?
在植物育种中,如何评价数量性状预测的准确性对于从多个可能的选择中选出最佳模型至关重要。皮尔逊相关系数(Pearson's correlation coefficient,PCC)是量化两个变量之间线性关联强度的指标,被广泛用于评估数量性状预测模型的准确性,在大多数情况下通常表现良好。然而,PCC 并不总能全面反映预测的准确性,尤其是在基于机器学习的方法中涉及非线性关系或复杂依赖关系的情况下。我们发现,许多关于定量性状预测的论文仅使用 PCC 作为单一指标来评估其模型的准确性,这从形式上看是不够的,也是有局限性的。本研究针对这一关键问题,列举了一个典型实例,并利用四种传统方法和四种基于机器学习的方法对 PCC 和其他九种评价指标进行了对比分析,从而有助于提高植物数量性状预测模型的实际应用性和可靠性。建议根据具体应用场景,有针对性地将 PCC 与其他评价指标结合使用,以减少得出误导性结论的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Plant Science
Frontiers in Plant Science PLANT SCIENCES-
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
4844
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: In an ever changing world, plant science is of the utmost importance for securing the future well-being of humankind. Plants provide oxygen, food, feed, fibers, and building materials. In addition, they are a diverse source of industrial and pharmaceutical chemicals. Plants are centrally important to the health of ecosystems, and their understanding is critical for learning how to manage and maintain a sustainable biosphere. Plant science is extremely interdisciplinary, reaching from agricultural science to paleobotany, and molecular physiology to ecology. It uses the latest developments in computer science, optics, molecular biology and genomics to address challenges in model systems, agricultural crops, and ecosystems. Plant science research inquires into the form, function, development, diversity, reproduction, evolution and uses of both higher and lower plants and their interactions with other organisms throughout the biosphere. Frontiers in Plant Science welcomes outstanding contributions in any field of plant science from basic to applied research, from organismal to molecular studies, from single plant analysis to studies of populations and whole ecosystems, and from molecular to biophysical to computational approaches. Frontiers in Plant Science publishes articles on the most outstanding discoveries across a wide research spectrum of Plant Science. The mission of Frontiers in Plant Science is to bring all relevant Plant Science areas together on a single platform.
期刊最新文献
Assessing seed characteristics for improved winter survival of late-fall-seeded lentils. Geographical origin orchestrates acteoside accumulation in Rehmannia glutinosa via coordinated transcriptomic and metabolomic reprogramming. Dissecting fruit weight and quality traits in Australian passion fruit through genetic linkage mapping and QTL analysis. JA-mediated H2O2 and ABA signaling enhances root hydraulic conductance in cotton under partial root-zone irrigation. Optimizing nitrogen management in grain rotations: balancing retention and photosynthesis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1