Abstract:The ability to interpret the predictions made by quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSARs) offers a number of advantages. While QSARs built using nonlinear modeling approaches, such as the popular Random Forest algorithm, might sometimes be more predictive than those built using linear modeling approaches, their predictions have been perceived as difficult to interpret. However, a growing number of approaches have been proposed for interpreting nonlinear QSAR models in general and Random Forest in particular. In the current work, we compare the performance of Random Forest to those of two widely used linear modeling approaches: linear Support Vector Machines (SVMs) (or Support Vector Regression (SVR)) and partial least-squares (PLS). We compare their performance in terms of their predictivity as well as the chemical interpretability of the predictions using novel scoring schemes for assessing heat map images of substructural contributions. We critically assess different approaches for interpreting Random Forest models as well as for obtaining predictions from the forest. We assess the models on a large number of widely employed public-domain benchmark data sets corresponding to regression and binary classification problems of relevance to hit identification and toxicology. We conclude that Random Forest typically yields comparable or possibly better predictive performance than the linear modeling approaches and that its predictions may also be interpreted in a chemically and biologically meaningful way. In contrast to earlier work looking at interpretation of nonlinear QSAR models, we directly compare two methodologically distinct approaches for interpreting Random Forest models. The approaches for interpreting Random Forest assessed in our article were implemented using open-source programs that we have made available to the community. These programs are the rfFC package ( https://r-forge.r-project.org/R/?group_id=1725 ) for the R statistical programming language and the Python program HeatMapWrapper [ https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.495163 ] for heat map generation.

Randomness control and reproducibility study of random forest algorithm in R and Python

Consistency of random forests

Understanding Random Forests: From Theory to Practice

ggRandomForests: Exploring Random Forest Survival

A random forest guided tour

Common, uncommon, and novel applications of random forest in psychological research

Rainforest plots for the presentation of patient-subgroup analysis in clinical trials

The random forest algorithm for statistical learning

Comparison of the Predictive Performance and Interpretability of Random Forest and Linear Models on Benchmark Data Sets

The All Relevant Feature Selection using Random Forest

ggRandomForests: Visually Exploring a Random Forest for Regression

Random Forests: some methodological insights

Hyperparameters and tuning strategies for random forest

Reproducing Random Forest Efficacy in Detecting Port Scanning

Probabilistic Random Forest: A machine learning algorithm for noisy datasets

pyRforest: A comprehensive R package for genomic data analysis featuring scikit-learn Random Forests in R

Evaluation of Random Forest Based Methods for Controlling Confounding Factors

Arbres CART et Forêts aléatoires, Importance et sélection de variables

A comparison of random forest variable selection methods for classification prediction modeling

Scalable and Efficient Hypothesis Testing with Random Forests

Randomization Can Reduce Both Bias and Variance: A Case Study in Random Forests