Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/SVG/jax.js
Research article Special Issues

Deciphering and identifying pan-cancer RAS pathway activation based on graph autoencoder and ClassifierChain

  • The goal of precision oncology is to select more effective treatments or beneficial drugs for patients. The transcription of ‘‘hidden responders’’ which precision oncology often fails to identify for patients is important for revealing responsive molecular states. Recently, a RAS pathway activation detection method based on machine learning and a nature-inspired deep RAS activation pan-cancer has been proposed. However, we note that the activating gene variations found in KRAS, HRAS and NRAS vary substantially across cancers. Besides, the ability of a machine learning classifier to detect which KRAS, HRAS and NRAS gain of function mutations or copy number alterations causes the RAS pathway activation is not clear. Here, we proposed a deep neural network framework for deciphering and identifying pan-cancer RAS pathway activation (DIPRAS). DIPRAS brings a new insight into deciphering and identifying the pan-cancer RAS pathway activation from a deeper perspective. In addition, we further revealed the identification and characterization of RAS aberrant pathway activity through gene ontological enrichment and pathological analysis. The source code is available by the URL https://github.com/zhaoyw456/DIPRAS.

    Citation: Jianting Gong, Yingwei Zhao, Xiantao Heng, Yongbing Chen, Pingping Sun, Fei He, Zhiqiang Ma, Zilin Ren. Deciphering and identifying pan-cancer RAS pathway activation based on graph autoencoder and ClassifierChain[J]. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(8): 4951-4967. doi: 10.3934/era.2023253

    Related Papers:

    [1] Weili Kong, Yuanfu Shao . The effects of fear and delay on a predator-prey model with Crowley-Martin functional response and stage structure for predator. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(12): 29260-29289. doi: 10.3934/math.20231498
    [2] Ting Gao, Xinyou Meng . Stability and Hopf bifurcation of a delayed diffusive phytoplankton-zooplankton-fish model with refuge and two functional responses. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(4): 8867-8901. doi: 10.3934/math.2023445
    [3] Fatao Wang, Ruizhi Yang, Yining Xie, Jing Zhao . Hopf bifurcation in a delayed reaction diffusion predator-prey model with weak Allee effect on prey and fear effect on predator. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(8): 17719-17743. doi: 10.3934/math.2023905
    [4] Weijie Lu, Yonghui Xia . Periodic solution of a stage-structured predator-prey model with Crowley-Martin type functional response. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(5): 8162-8175. doi: 10.3934/math.2022454
    [5] Jorge Luis Ramos-Castellano, Miguel Angel Dela-Rosa, Iván Loreto-Hernández . Bifurcation analysis for the coexistence in a Gause-type four-species food web model with general functional responses. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(11): 30263-30297. doi: 10.3934/math.20241461
    [6] Reshma K P, Ankit Kumar . Stability and bifurcation in a predator-prey system with effect of fear and additional food. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(2): 4211-4240. doi: 10.3934/math.2024208
    [7] Yaping Wang, Yuanfu Shao, Chuanfu Chai . Dynamics of a predator-prey model with fear effects and gestation delays. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(3): 7535-7559. doi: 10.3934/math.2023378
    [8] Yingyan Zhao, Changjin Xu, Yiya Xu, Jinting Lin, Yicheng Pang, Zixin Liu, Jianwei Shen . Mathematical exploration on control of bifurcation for a 3D predator-prey model with delay. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(11): 29883-29915. doi: 10.3934/math.20241445
    [9] Qinghui Liu, Xin Zhang . Chaos detection in predator-prey dynamics with delayed interactions and Ivlev-type functional response. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(9): 24555-24575. doi: 10.3934/math.20241196
    [10] Ruizhi Yang, Dan Jin, Wenlong Wang . A diffusive predator-prey model with generalist predator and time delay. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(3): 4574-4591. doi: 10.3934/math.2022255
  • The goal of precision oncology is to select more effective treatments or beneficial drugs for patients. The transcription of ‘‘hidden responders’’ which precision oncology often fails to identify for patients is important for revealing responsive molecular states. Recently, a RAS pathway activation detection method based on machine learning and a nature-inspired deep RAS activation pan-cancer has been proposed. However, we note that the activating gene variations found in KRAS, HRAS and NRAS vary substantially across cancers. Besides, the ability of a machine learning classifier to detect which KRAS, HRAS and NRAS gain of function mutations or copy number alterations causes the RAS pathway activation is not clear. Here, we proposed a deep neural network framework for deciphering and identifying pan-cancer RAS pathway activation (DIPRAS). DIPRAS brings a new insight into deciphering and identifying the pan-cancer RAS pathway activation from a deeper perspective. In addition, we further revealed the identification and characterization of RAS aberrant pathway activity through gene ontological enrichment and pathological analysis. The source code is available by the URL https://github.com/zhaoyw456/DIPRAS.



    Henkin and Skolem introduced Hilbert algebras in the fifties for investigations in intuitionistic and other non-classical logics. Diego [5] proved that Hilbert algebras form a variety which is locally finite. Bandaru et al. introduced the notion of GE-algebras which is a generalization of Hilbert algebras, and investigated several properties (see [1,2,3,8,9]). The notion of interior operator is introduced by Vorster [13] in an arbitrary category, and it is used in [4] to study the notions of connectedness and disconnectedness in topology. Interior algebras are a certain type of algebraic structure that encodes the idea of the topological interior of a set, and are a generalization of topological spaces defined by means of topological interior operators. Rachůnek and Svoboda [7] studied interior operators on bounded residuated lattices, and Svrcek [12] studied multiplicative interior operators on GMV-algebras. Lee et al. [6] applied the interior operator theory to GE-algebras, and they introduced the concepts of (commutative, transitive, left exchangeable, belligerent, antisymmetric) interior GE-algebras and bordered interior GE-algebras, and investigated their relations and properties. Later, Song et al. [10,11] introduced the notions of an interior GE-filter, a weak interior GE-filter, a belligerent interior GE-filter, prominent interior GE-filter and investigate their relations and properties. They provided relations between a belligerent interior GE-filter and an interior GE-filter and conditions for an interior GE-filter to be a belligerent interior GE-filter is considered. Also, they provided relations between a prominent interior GE-filter and an interior GE-filter and conditions for an interior GE-filter to be a prominent interior GE-filter is considered. Given a subset and an element, they established an interior GE-filter, and they considered conditions for a subset to be a belligerent interior GE-filter. They studied the extensibility of the belligerent interior GE-filter and established relationships between weak interior GE-filter and belligerent interior GE-filter of type 1–type 3. Also, they introduced the concept of a prominent interior GE-filter of type 1 and type 2, and investigate their properties. They studied the relationship between a prominent interior GE-filter and a prominent interior GE-filter of type 1.

    In this manuscript, we introduce the concept of an imploring interior GE-filter, and investigate their properties. We discuss the relationship between an interior GE-filter and an imploring interior GE-filter. We provide conditions for an interior GE-filter to be an imploring interior GE-filter and give examples to show that an imploring interior GE-filter is independent to a belligerent interior GE-filter. We provide conditions for an imploring interior GE-filter to be a belligerent interior GE-filter. We discuss the relationship between imploring interior GE-filter and prominent interior GE-filter and give example to show that any imploring interior GE-filter is not a prominent interior GE-filter. We provide conditions for an imploring interior GE-filter to be a prominent interior GE-filter. Also, we consider conditions under which an interior GE-filter larger than a given interior GE-filter to become an imploring interior GE-filter.

    Definition 2.1 ([1]). By a GE-algebra we mean a non-empty set X with a constant 1 and a binary operation satisfying the following axioms:

    (GE1) ˜x˜x=1,

    (GE2) 1˜x=˜x,

    (GE3) ˜x(˜y˜z)=˜x(˜y(˜x˜z)),

    for all ˜x,˜y,˜zX.

    In a GE-algebra X, a binary relation "" is defined by

    (˜x,˜yX)(˜x˜y˜x˜y=1). (2.1)

    Definition 2.2 ([1,2]). A GE-algebra X is said to be

    transitive if it satisfies:

    (˜x,˜y,˜zX)(˜x˜y(˜z˜x)(˜z˜y)); (2.2)

    belligerent if it satisfies:

    (˜x,˜y,˜zX)(˜x(˜y˜z)=(˜x˜y)(˜x˜z)). (2.3)

    Proposition 2.3 ([1]). Every GE-algebra X satisfies the following items.

    (˜xX)(˜x1=1). (2.4)
    (˜x,˜yX)(˜x(˜x˜y)=˜x˜y). (2.5)
    (˜x,˜yX)(˜x˜y˜x). (2.6)
    (˜x,˜y,˜zX)(˜x(˜y˜z)˜y(˜x˜z)). (2.7)
    (˜xX)(1˜x˜x=1). (2.8)
    (˜x,˜yX)(˜x(˜y˜x)˜x). (2.9)
    (˜x,˜yX)(˜x(˜x˜y)˜y). (2.10)
    (˜x,˜y,˜zX)(˜x˜y˜z˜y˜x˜z). (2.11)

    If X is transitive, then

    (˜x,˜y,˜zX)(˜x˜y˜z˜x˜z˜y,˜y˜z˜x˜z). (2.12)
    (˜x,˜y,˜zX)(˜x˜y(˜y˜z)(˜x˜z)). (2.13)
    (˜x,˜y,˜zX)(˜x˜y,˜y˜z˜x˜z). (2.14)

    Lemma 2.4 ([1]). A GE-algebra X is transitive if and only if X satisfies the condition (2.13).

    Definition 2.5 ([1]). A subset F of a GE-algebra X is called a GE-filter of X if it satisfies:

    1F, (2.15)
    (˜x,˜yX)(˜x˜yF,˜xF˜yF). (2.16)

    Lemma 2.6 ([1]). In a GE-algebra X, every GE-filter F of X satisfies:

    (˜x,˜yX)(˜x˜y,˜xF˜yF). (2.17)

    Definition 2.7 ([2,8,9]). A subset F of a GE-algebra X containing the constant 1 is called:

    A belligerent GE-filter of X if it satisfies

    (˜x,˜y,˜zX)(˜x(˜y˜z)F,˜x˜yF˜x˜zF). (2.18)

    A prominent GE-filter of X if it satisfies

    (˜x,˜y,˜zX)(˜x(˜y˜z)F,˜xF((˜z˜y)˜y)˜zF). (2.19)

    An imploring GE-filter of X if it satisfies

    (˜x,˜y,˜zX)(˜x((˜y˜z)˜y)F,˜xF˜yF). (2.20)

    Lemma 2.8 ([8]). Let F be a GE-filter of a GE-algebra X. Then F is a prominent GE-filter of X if and only if it satisfies:

    (˜x,˜yX)(˜x˜yF((˜y˜x)˜x)˜yF). (2.21)

    Definition 2.9 ([6]). By an interior GE-algebra we mean a pair (X,ξ) in which X is a GE-algebra and ξ:XX is a mapping such that

    (˜xX)(˜xξ(˜x)), (2.22)
    (˜xX)((ξξ)(˜x)=ξ(˜x)), (2.23)
    (˜x,˜yX)(˜x˜yξ(˜x)ξ(˜y)). (2.24)

    Definition 2.10 ([6]). An interior GE-algebra (X,ξ) is said to be

    transitive if it satisfies:

    (˜x,˜y,˜zX)(ξ(˜x˜y)ξ((˜z˜x)(˜z˜y))); (2.25)

    belligerent if it satisfies:

    (˜x,˜y,˜zX)(ξ(˜x(˜y˜z))=ξ((˜x˜y)(˜x˜z))). (2.26)

    Definition 2.11 ([11]). Let (X,ξ) be an interior GE-algebra. A GE-filter F of X is said to be interior if it satisfies:

    (˜xX)(ξ(˜x)F˜xF). (2.27)

    Definition 2.12 ([11]). Let (X,ξ) be an interior GE-algebra. Then a subset F of X is called a belligerent interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) if F is a belligerent GE-filter of X which satisfies the condition (2.27).

    Definition 2.13 ([10]). Let (X,ξ) be an interior GE-algebra. Then a subset F of X is called a prominent interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) if F is a prominent GE-filter of X which satisfies the condition (2.27).

    Definition 3.1. An interior GE-algebra (X,ξ) is said to be pre-transitive (resp., pre-belligerent, if X itself is transitive (resp., belligerent).

    It is clear that every pre-transitive (resp., pre-belligerent) interior GE-algebra is a transitive (resp., belligerent) interior GE-algebra, but the converse is not true (see [6]).

    In what follows, let (X,ξ) denote an interior GE-algebra unless otherwise specified.

    Definition 3.2. A subset F of X in (X,ξ) is called an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) if F contains the constant "1" and satisfies (2.20) and (2.27).

    Example 3.3. Consider a set X={1,a,b,c,d} with the binary operation given as follows:

    1abcd11abcda111ccb111ddc1aa11d1aa11

    If we define a mapping ξ on X as follows:

    ξ:XX,x{1if ˜x=1,aif ˜x{a,b},cif ˜x{c,d},

    then (X,ξ) is an interior GE-algebra and F:={1,a,b} is an imploring interior GE-filter in in (X,ξ).

    We first discuss the relationship between interior GE-filter and imploring interior GE-filter.

    Theorem 3.4. Every imploring interior GE-filter is an interior GE-filter.

    Proof. Let F be an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ). Then 1F and (2.27) is clearly true. Let x,yX be such that xyF and xF. The combination of (GE1) and (GE2) leads to

    x((yy)y)=xyF.

    It follows from (2.20) that yF. Hence F is an interior GE-filter in (X,ξ).

    The following example shows that the converse of Theorem 3.4 is not true.

    Example 3.5. Let X={1,a,b,c,d} and consider a binary operation and a mapping ξ on X given as follows:

    1abcd11abcda111cdb111cdc1aa1dd1bb11

    and

    ξ:XX,x{1if ˜x=1,aif ˜x{a,b},cif ˜x{c,d}.

    Then (X,ξ) is an interior GE-algebra and the set F:={1,a,b} is an interior GE-filter in (X,ξ). But it is not imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) since

    1((cd)c)=1(dc)=11=1F

    and 1F but cF.

    We find and present the conditions under which interior GE-filter becomes imploring interior GE-filter.

    Theorem 3.6. Given an interior GE-filter F in (X,ξ), the following arguments are equivalent.

    (i) F is an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ). (ii) F satisfies:

    (x,yX)(ξ((xy)x)FxF). (3.1)

    Proof. Assume that F is an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) and let x,yX be such that ξ((xy)x)F. Then

    1((xy)x)=(xy)xF

    by (GE2) and (2.27). It follows from (2.20) that xF.

    Conversely, let F be an interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) which satisfies the condition (3.1). It is clear that F contains the constant 1 and satisfies the condition (2.27). Let x,y,zX be such that x((yz)y)F and xF. Then (yz)yF by (2.16), and so (yz)yξ((yz)y) by (2.22). Hence ξ((yz)y)F since F is a GE-filter of X. Thus yF by (2.27). Therefore F is an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ).

    Given a subset F of X in (X,ξ), consider the following argument.

    (x,yX)(ξ((xy)y)F(yx)xF). (3.2)

    The following example shows that (imploring) interior GE-filter F in (X,ξ) does not satisfy the argument (3.2).

    Example 3.7. (1) If we consider the interior GE-algebra (X,ξ) in Example 3.5, then the set F:={1,a,b} is an interior GE-filter in (X,ξ). But it does not satisfy the argument (3.2) since ξ((cd)d)=ξ(dd)=ξ(1)=1F but (dc)c=1c=cF.

    (2) Let X={1,a,b,c,d,e} and define binary operation as follows:

    1abcde11abcdea111cddb111cddc1aa1eed1aa111e1aac11

    If we define a mapping ξ on X as follows:

    ξ:XX,x{1if ˜x=1,aif ˜x{a,b},cif ˜x=c,dif ˜x{d,e},

    then (X,ξ) is an interior GE-algebra and the set F:={1,a,b} is an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ). But it does not satisfy the argument (3.2) since ξ((cd)d)=ξ(ed)=ξ(1)=1F but (dc)c=1c=cF.

    We explore conditions under which imploring interior GE-filter can satisfy the argument (3.2).

    Proposition 3.8. If (X,ξ) is a pre-transitive interior GE-algebra, then every imploring interior GE-filter F satisfies the argument (3.2).

    Proof. Let F be an imploring interior GE-filter in a pre-transitive interior GE-algebra (X,ξ). Then F is an interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) by Theorem 3.4. Let x,yX be such that ξ((xy)y)F. Then (xy)yF by (2.27). Since x(yx)x by (2.9), it follows from (2.12) that ((yx)x)yxy. Hence

    (xy)y(yx)((xy)x)(xy)((yx)x)(((yx)x)y)((yx)x)

    by (2.7), (2.12) and (2.13). Using (GE2) and Lemma 2.6 derive

    1((((yx)x)y)((yx)x))=(((yx)x)y)((yx)x)F,

    which implies from (2.20) that (yx)xF.

    Corollary 3.9. If (X,ξ) is a pre-belligerent interior GE-algebra, then every imploring interior GE-filter F satisfies the argument (3.2).

    Question. If (X,ξ) is a pre-transitive interior GE-algebra, then

    1. is any interior GE-filter an imploring interior GE-filter?

    2. does any interior GE-filter F satisfy the argument (3.2)?

    The following example provides a negative answer to the above Question.

    Example 3.10. Let X={1,a,b,c,d} and define binary operation as follows:

    1abcd11abcda111cdb111cdc1aa1dd1ab11

    If we define a mapping ξ on X as follows:

    ξ:XX,x{1if x=1,aif x{a,b},cif x{c,d},

    then (X,ξ) is a pre-transitive interior GE-algebra. It is routine to verify that the set F:={1,a,b} is an interior GE-filter in (X,ξ). But it is not an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) since 1((cd)c)=1(dc)=11=1F and 1F but cF. Also, it does not satisfy (3.2) since ξ((cd)d)=ξ(dd)=ξ(1)=1F but (dc)c=1c=cF.

    We consider conditions for an interior GE-filter to be an imploring interior GE-filter.

    Theorem 3.11. Let F be an interior GE-filter in a pre-transitive interior GE-algebra (X,ξ). If F satisfies the argument (3.2), then it is an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ).

    Proof. Assume that F is an interior GE-filter in a pre-transitive interior GE-algebra (X,ξ) which satisfies the argument (3.2). Let x,yX be such that ξ((xy)x)F. Since the combination of (2.5), (2.10) and (2.12) induces

    (xy)x(xy)((xy)y)=(xy)y,

    we get ξ((xy)y)F by (2.24) and Lemma 2.6. Hence (yx)xF by (3.2). Combining (2.6) and (2.12), we get (xy)xyx, and so ξ((xy)x)ξ(yx) by (2.24). Since ξ((xy)x)F, we obtain ξ(yx)F by Lemma 2.6. If follows from (2.27) that yxF. Since (yx)xF, we have xF by (2.16). Therefore F is an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) by Theorem 3.6.

    Corollary 3.12. Let F be an interior GE-filter in a pre-belligerent interior GE-algebra (X,ξ). If F satisfies the the argument (3.2), then it is an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ).

    In the following example, we can confirm that an imploring interior GE-filter is independent to a belligerent interior GE-filter.

    Example 3.13. (1) Let X={1,a,b,c,d,e} and define binary operation as follows:

    1abcde11abcdea111cddb111cddc1aa1ddd1aac11e1aa111

    If we define a mapping ξ on X as follows:

    ξ:XX,x{1if x=1,aif x{a,b},cif x=c,dif x=d,eif x=e,

    then (X,ξ) is an interior GE-algebra which is not pre-transitive since

    (ec)((ae)(ac))=1(dc)=1c=c1.

    We can observe that the set F:={1,a,b} is an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ). But F can not be a belligerent interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) because d(ec)=d1=1F and de=1F but dc=cF.

    (2) Let X={1,a,b,c,d} and define binary operation as follows:

    1abcd11abcda111cdb111cdc1ab1dd11b11

    If we define a mapping ξ on X as follows:

    ξ:XX,x{1if x=1,aif x{a,b},cif x=c,dif x=d,

    then (X,ξ) is an interior GE-algebra which is not pre-transitive since

    (ab)((da)(db))=1(1b)=1b=b1.

    Let F={1,a,b}. Then we can observe that F is a belligerent interior GE-filter in (X,ξ). But F is not imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) since 1((cd)c)=1(dc)=11=1F and 1F but cF.

    We explore the conditions under which imploring interior GE-filter becomes belligerent interior GE-filter.

    Lemma 3.14. Let (X,ξ) be a pre-transitive interior GE-algebra. Then every interior GE-filter is a belligerent interior GE-filter.

    Proof. Let F be an interior GE-filter in (X,ξ). Clearly the argument (2.27) is valid and F contains the constant 1. Let x,y,zX be such that x(yz)F and xyF. By (2.7), (2.12) and (2.5), we have

    x(yz)y(xz)(xy)(x(xz))=(xy)(xz).

    Since F is a GE-filter of X and x(yz)F, we get (xy)(xz)F. Hence xzF by Lemma 2.6. Therefore F is a belligerent interior GE-filter in (X,ξ).

    Corollary 3.15. In a pre-transitive interior GE-algebra, every imploring interior GE-filter is a belligerent interior GE-filter.

    Corollary 3.16. In a pre-belligerent interior GE-algebra, every imploring interior GE-filter is a belligerent interior GE-filter.

    The following example shows that the converse of Corollary 3.15 and Corollary 3.16 is not true in general.

    Example 3.17. (1) Consider the pre-transitive interior GE-algebra (X,ξ) which is described in Example 3.10. As

    d(cb)=da=ab=1b=(dc)(db),

    it is not pre-belligerent. Then we can observe that F:={1,a,b} is a belligerent interior GE-filter in (X,ξ). But F is not imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) since 1((cd)c)=1(dc)=11=1F and 1F but cF.

    (2) Let X={1,a,b,c,d} and define binary operation as follows:

    1abcd11abcda111cdb111cdc1aa1dd1aa11

    If we define a mapping ξ on X as follows:

    ξ:XX,x{1if x=1,aif x{a,b},cif x{c,d},

    then (X,ξ) is a pre-belligerent interior GE-algebra. Let F={1,a,b}. Then we can observe that F is a belligerent interior GE-filter in (X,ξ). But F is not imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) since 1((cd)c)=1(dc)=11=1F and 1F but cF.

    We establish a relationship between imploring interior GE-filter and prominent interior GE-filter.

    Theorem 3.18. In a GE-algebra, every prominent interior GE-filter is an imploring interior GE-filter.

    Proof. Let F be a prominent interior GE-filter in (X,ξ). Then it is an interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) (see Theorem 3.4 in [10]), and so 1F and F satisfies (2.27). Let x,y,zX be such that x((yz)y)F and xF. Since F is a GE-filter of X, we have (yz)yF. Since F is a prominent GE-filter of X, it follows from (GE1), (GE2), (2.5) and Lemma 2.8 that

    y=1y=((yz)(yz))y=(((y(yz))(yz))yF.

    Therefore F is an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ).

    The converse of Theorem 3.18 is not true as seen in the following example.

    Example 3.19. Consider the interior GE-algebra (X,ξ) in Example 3.7(2). It is not pre-transitive because

    (dc)((ed)(ec))=1(1c)=1c=c1.

    Let F:={1,a,b}. Then we can observe that F is an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ). But F is not a prominent interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) since 1(dc)=11=1F and 1F but ((cd)d)c=(ed)c=1c=cF.

    The combination of Theorem 3.18 and Corollary 3.15 induces the next corollary.

    Corollary 3.20. In a pre-transitive GE-algebra, every prominent interior GE-filter is a belligerent interior GE-filter.

    Consider the pre-transitive interior GE-algebra (X,ξ) which is described in Example 3.10. As

    d(cb)=da=ab=1b=(dc)(db),

    it is not pre-belligerent. Then we can observe that F:={1,a,b} is a belligerent interior GE-filter in (X,ξ). But F is not a prominent interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) since 1(dc)=11=1F and 1F but ((cd)d)c=(dd)c=1c=cF. Hence we know that the converse of Corollary 3.20 is not true in general.

    We can strengthen the conditions of interior GE-algebra so that imploring interior GE-filter becomes prominent interior GE-filter.

    Theorem 3.21. If (X,ξ) is a pre-transitive interior GE-algebra, then every imploring interior GE-filter is a prominent interior GE-filter.

    Proof. Let F be an imploring interior GE-filter in a pre-transitive interior GE-algebra (X,ξ). Then F satisfies (2.27) and it is an interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) (see Theorem 3.4), and so F is a GE-filter of X. Let x,yX be such that xyF. Note that y((yx)x)y by (2.6), and thus (((yx)x)y)xyx by (2.12). It follows from (2.2), (2.7) and (2.12) that

    xy((yx)x)((yx)y)(yx)(((yx)x)y)((((yx)x)y)x)(((yx)x)y).

    Hence ((((yx)x)y)x)(((yx)x)y)F by Lemma 2.6, and so

    1(((((yx)x)y)x)(((yx)x)y))=((((yx)x)y)x)(((yx)x)y)F

    by (GE2). Since 1F, we have ((yx)x)yF by (2.20). This shows that F is a prominent GE-filter of X by Lemma 2.8, and therefore F is a prominent interior GE-filter in (X,ξ).

    Corollary 3.22. If (X,ξ) is a pre-belligerent interior GE-algebra, then every imploring interior GE-filter is a prominent interior GE-filter.

    The following example shows that prominent interior GE-filter and belligerent interior GE-filter are independent of each other.

    Example 3.23. (1) Let X={1,a,b,c,d,e} and define binary operation as follows:

    1abcde11abcdea111cdeb111cdec1aa1d1d1aac11e1aa111

    If we define a mapping ξ on X as follows:

    ξ:XX,x{1if x=1,aif x{a,b},cif x=c,dif x=d,eif x=e,

    then (X,ξ) is an interior GE-algebra. We can observe that the set F:={1,a,b} is a prominent interior GE-filter in (X,ξ). But it is not a belligerent interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) because of d(ec)=d1=1F and de=1F but dc=cF.

    (2) In Example 3.13(2), we can observe that F:={1,a,b} is a belligerent interior GE-filter in (X,ξ). But it is not a prominent interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) since 1(dc)=11=1F and 1F but ((cd)d)c=(dd)c=1c=cF.

    We build the extension property of imploring interior GE-filter.

    Lemma 3.24. In a pre-transitive interior GE-algebra (X,ξ), every interior GE-filter F satisfies:

    (x,y,zX)(ξ(x(yz))F(xy)(xz)F). (3.3)

    Proof. Let x,y,zX be such that ξ(x(yz))F. Since

    x(yz)x((xy)(xz))x(x((xy)z))=x((xy)z)(xy)(xz),

    we get ξ(x(yz))ξ((xy)(xz)) by (2.24). It follows from Lemma 2.6 and (2.27) that (xy)(xz)F.

    Theorem 3.25. Let F and G be interior GE-filters in a pre-transitive interior GE-algebra (X,ξ). If F is contained in G and F is an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ), then G is also an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ).

    Proof. Assume that FG and F is an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ). Let x,yX be such that ξ((xy)y)G. Then (xy)yG by (2.27). Since ξ(((xy)y)((xy)y))=ξ(1)=1F, It follows from Lemma 3.24 that (((xy)y)(xy))(((xy)y)y)F. Using (2.7) and (2.12), we have

    (((xy)y)(xy))(((xy)y)y)(x(((xy)y)y))(((xy)y)y).

    Hence (x(((xy)y)y))(((xy)y)y)F by Lemma 2.6, and so

    ξ((x(((xy)y)y))(((xy)y)y))F

    by (2.22) and Lemma 2.6. Since F is an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ), we have

    ((((xy)y)y)x)xFG

    by Proposition 3.8. Note that

    (xy)y(((xy)y)y)y(yx)((((xy)y)y)x)(((((xy)y)y)x)x)((yx)x).

    It follows from Lemma 2.6 that

    (((((xy)y)y)x)x)((yx)x)G.

    Thus (yx)xG, and consequently G is an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ) by Theorem 3.11.

    Corollary 3.26. Let F and G be interior GE-filters in a pre-belligerent interior GE-algebra (X,ξ). If F is contained in G and F is an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ), then G is also an imploring interior GE-filter in (X,ξ).

    We have introduced the concept of an imploring interior GE-filter and investigated their properties. We have discussed the relationship between an interior GE-filter and an imploring interior GE-filter. We have given an example to show that any interior GE-filter is not an imploring interior GE-filter. We have given conditions for an interior GE-filter to be an imploring interior GE-filter. We have provided examples to show that an imploring interior GE-filter is independent to a belligerent interior GE-filter. Conditions for an imploring interior GE-filter to be a belligerent interior GE-filter are given. We have discussed the relationship between imploring interior GE-filter and prominent interior GE-filter. We have provided an example to show that any imploring interior GE-filter is not a prominent interior GE-filter. Conditions for an imploring interior GE-filter to be a prominent interior GE-filter are given. Also, we have considered the conditions under which an interior GE-filter larger than a given interior GE-filter can become an imploring interior GE-filter. In future, we will study the prime and maximal imploring interior GE-filters and their topological properties. Moreover, based on the ideas and results obtained in this paper, we will study the interior operator theory in related algebraic systems such as MV-algebra, BL-algebra, EQ-algebra, etc. It will also be used for pseudo algebra systems and further to conduct research related to the very true operator theory.

    The authors wish to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable suggestions.

    All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.



    [1] S. H. Shin, A. M. Bode, Z. Dong, Addressing the challenges of applying precision oncology, NPJ Precis. Oncol., 1 (2017), 28. http://doi.org/10.1038/s41698-017-0032-z doi: 10.1038/s41698-017-0032-z
    [2] D. M. Hyman, B. S. Taylor, J. Baselga, Implementing genome-driven oncology, Cell, 168 (2017), 584–599. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2016.12.015 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2016.12.015
    [3] I. F. Tannock, J. A. Hickman, Limits to personalized cancer medicine, N. Engl. J. Med., 375 (2016), 1289–1294. http://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsb1607705 doi: 10.1056/NEJMsb1607705
    [4] C. Kumar-Sinha, A. M. Chinnaiyan, Precision oncology in the age of integrative genomics, Nat. Biotechnol., 36 (2018), 46–60. http://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4017 doi: 10.1038/nbt.4017
    [5] G. P. Way, F. Sanchez-Vega, K. La, J. Armenia, W. K. Chatila, A. Luna, et al., Machine learning detects pan-cancer RAS pathway activation in the cancer genome atlas, Cell Rep, 23 (2018), 172–180. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2018.03.046 doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2018.03.046
    [6] X. Li, S. Li, Y. Wang, S. Zhang, K. C. Wong, Identification of pan-cancer RAS pathway activation with deep learning, Briefings Bioinf., 22 (2021), bbaa258. http://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbaa258 doi: 10.1093/bib/bbaa258
    [7] J. Zhang, Y. Zhang, Z. Ma, In silico prediction of human secretory proteins in plasma based on discrete firefly optimization and application to cancer biomarkers identification, Front. Genet., 10 (2019), 542. http://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2019.00542 doi: 10.3389/fgene.2019.00542
    [8] R. Scharpf, G. Riely, M. Awad, M. Lenoue-Newton, B. Ricciuti, J. Rudolph, et al., Comprehensive pan-cancer analyses of RAS genomic diversity, Cancer Res., 80 (2020), 1095. http://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7445.Am2020-1095 doi: 10.1158/1538-7445.Am2020-1095
    [9] A. K. Murugan, M. Grieco, N. Tsuchida, RAS mutations in human cancers: Roles in precision medicine, in Seminars in Cancer Biology, Academic Press, (2019), 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semcancer.2019.06.007
    [10] I. A. Prior, P. D. Lewis, C. Mattos, A comprehensive survey of RAS mutations in cancer, Cancer Res., 72 (2012), 2457–2467. http://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.can-11-2612 doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.can-11-2612
    [11] W. Pao, T. Y. Wang, G. J. Riely, V. A. Miller, Q. Pan, M. Ladanyi, et al., KRAS mutations and primary resistance of lung adenocarcinomas to gefitinib or erlotinib, PLoS Med., 2 (2005), e17. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020017 doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020017
    [12] Z. Wu, S. Pan, F. Chen, G. Long, C. Zhang, P. S. Yu, A comprehensive survey on graph neural networks, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks Learn. Syst., 32 (2021), 4–24. http://doi.org/10.1109/TNNLS.2020.2978386 doi: 10.1109/TNNLS.2020.2978386
    [13] R. Hasibi, T. Michoel, A graph feature auto-encoder for the prediction of unobserved node features on biological networks, BMC Bioinf., 22 (2021), 525. http://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-021-04447-3 doi: 10.1186/s12859-021-04447-3
    [14] J. Read, B. Pfahringer, G. Holmes, E. Frank, Classifier chains for multi-label classification, Mach. Learn., 85 (2011), 333–359. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10994-011-5256-5 doi: 10.1007/s10994-011-5256-5
    [15] T. N. Kipf, M. Welling, Semi-supervised classification with graph convolutional networks, arXiv preprint, (2016), arXiv: 1609.02907. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1609.02907
    [16] P. T. De Boer, D. P. Kroese, S. Mannor, R. Y. Rubinstein, A tutorial on the cross-entropy method, Ann. Oper. Res., 134 (2005), 19–67. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-005-5724-z doi: 10.1007/s10479-005-5724-z
    [17] D. P. Kingma, J. Ba, Adam: A method for stochastic optimization, arXiv preprint, (2014), arXiv: 1412.6980. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1412.6980
    [18] J. H. Cook, G. E. Melloni, D. C. Gulhan, P. J. Park, K. M. Haigis, The origins and genetic interactions of KRAS mutations are allele-and tissue-specific, Nat. Commun., 12 (2021), 1808. http://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-22125-z doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-22125-z
    [19] E. Becht, L. Mcinnes, J. Healy, C. A. Dutertre, I. W. H. Kwok, L. G. Ng, et al., Dimensionality reduction for visualizing single-cell data using UMAP, Nat. Biotechnol., 37 (2019), 38–44. http://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4314 doi: 10.1038/nbt.4314
    [20] V. J. Pandya, Comparing handwritten character recognition by AdaBoostClassifier and KNeighborsClassifier, in 2016 8th International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Communication Networks, IEEE, (2016), 271–274. http://doi.org/10.1109/Cicn.2016.59
    [21] Z. A. Huang, J. Zhang, Z. Zhu, E. Q. Wu, K. C. Tan, Identification of autistic risk candidate genes and toxic chemicals via multilabel learning, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks Learn. Syst., 32 (2020), 3971–3984. http://doi.org/10.1109/TNNLS.2020.3016357 doi: 10.1109/TNNLS.2020.3016357
    [22] S. M. Lundberg, S. I. Lee, A unified approach to interpreting model predictions, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30, (2017).
    [23] A. Shrikumar, P. Greenside, A. Kundaje, Learning important features through propagating activation differences, in International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, (2017), 3145–3153.
    [24] F. J. Martin, M. R. Amode, A. Aneja, O. Austine-Orimoloye, A. G. Azov, I. Barnes, et al., Ensembl 2023, Nucleic Acids Res., 51 (2023), D933–D941. http://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkac958 doi: 10.1093/nar/gkac958
    [25] H. Ogata, S. Goto, K. Sato, W. Fujibuchi, H. Bono, M. Kanehisa, KEGG: Kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes, Nucleic Acids Res., 27 (1999), 29–34. http://doi.org/10.1093/nar/27.1.29 doi: 10.1093/nar/27.1.29
    [26] T. Kodaki, R. Woscholski, B. Hallberg, P. Rodriguez-Viciana, J. Downward, P. J. Parker, The activation of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase by RAS, Curr. Biol., 4 (1994), 798–806. http://doi.org/10.1016/s0960-9822(00)00177-9 doi: 10.1016/s0960-9822(00)00177-9
    [27] P. M. Campbell, A. L. Groehler, K. M. Lee, M. M. Ouellette, V. Khazak, C. J. Der, K-RAS promotes growth transformation and invasion of immortalized human pancreatic cells by Raf and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase signaling, Cancer Res., 67 (2007), 2098–2106. http://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-3752 doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-3752
    [28] M. Zenker, Clinical manifestations of mutations in RAS and related intracellular signal transduction factors, Curr. Opin. Pediatr., 23 (2011), 443–451. http://doi.org/10.1097/MOP.0b013e32834881dd doi: 10.1097/MOP.0b013e32834881dd
    [29] J. L. Bos, M. Verlaan-De Vries, A. J. Van Der Eb, J. W. Janssen, R. Delwel, B. Lowenberg, et al., Mutations in N-RAS predominate in acute myeloid leukemia, Blood, 69 (1987), 1237–1241. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood.V69.4.1237.1237 doi: 10.1182/blood.V69.4.1237.1237
    [30] J. D. Khoury, M. Tashakori, H. Yang, S. Loghavi, Y. Wang, J. Wang, et al., Pan-RAF inhibition shows anti-leukemic activity in RAS-mutant acute myeloid leukemia cells and potentiates the effect of sorafenib in cells with FLT3 mutation, Cancers, 12 (2020), 3511. http://doi.org/ARTN351110.3390/cancers12123511
    [31] A. M. Akram, A. Chaudhary, H. Kausar, F. Althobaiti, A. S. Abbas, Z. Hussain, et al., Analysis of RAS gene mutations in cytogenetically normal de novo acute myeloid leukemia patients reveals some novel alterations, Saudi J. Biol. Sci., 28 (2021), 3735–3740. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2021.04.089 doi: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2021.04.089
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(1811) PDF downloads(86) Cited by(0)

Figures and Tables

Figures(8)  /  Tables(1)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog