Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision03:37

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision

Scientists typically make repeated measurements of a quantity to ensure the quality of their findings and to evaluate both the precision and the accuracy of their results. Measurements are said to be precise if they yield very similar results when repeated in the same manner. A measurement is considered accurate if it yields a result that is very close to the true or the accepted value. Precise values agree with each other; accurate values agree with a true value.
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...
Statistical Analysis: Overview01:11

Statistical Analysis: Overview

When we take repeated measurements on the same or replicated samples, we will observe inconsistencies in the magnitude. These inconsistencies are called errors. To categorize and characterize these results and their errors, the researcher can use statistical analysis to determine the quality of the measurements and/or suitability of the methods.
One of the most commonly used statistical quantifiers is the mean, which is the ratio between the sum of the numerical values of all results and the...
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Random Error01:04

Random Error

Random or indeterminate errors originate from various uncontrollable variables, such as variations in environmental conditions, instrument imperfections, or the inherent variability of the phenomena being measured. Usually, these errors cannot be predicted, estimated, or characterized because their direction and magnitude often vary in magnitude and direction even during consecutive measurements. As a result, they are difficult to eliminate. However, the aggregate effect of these errors can be...
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Understanding the determinants of public trust in the health care system in China: an analysis of a cross-sectional survey.

Journal of health services research & policy·2018
Same author

Adverse Childhood Experiences, Epigenetic Measures, and Obesity in Youth.

The Journal of pediatrics·2018
Same author

Regularized Latent Class Model for Joint Analysis of High-Dimensional Longitudinal Biomarkers and a Time-to-Event Outcome.

Biometrics·2018
Same author

LncRNA UCA1 sponges miR-204-5p to promote migration, invasion and epithelial-mesenchymal transition of glioma cells via upregulation of ZEB1.

Pathology, research and practice·2018
Same author

International variations in trust in health care systems.

The International journal of health planning and management·2018
Same author

Toll-like receptor 9 negatively regulates pancreatic islet beta cell growth and function in a mouse model of type 1 diabetes.

Diabetologia·2018

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 17, 2026

Closed-loop Neuro-robotic Experiments to Test Computational Properties of Neuronal Networks
11:18

Closed-loop Neuro-robotic Experiments to Test Computational Properties of Neuronal Networks

Published on: March 2, 2015

Are scale-free networks robust to measurement errors?

Nan Lin1, Hongyu Zhao

  • 1Department of Mathematics, Washington University, St. Louis, MO 63143, USA. nlin@math.wustl.edu

BMC Bioinformatics
|May 21, 2005
PubMed
Summary

Measurement errors like false positives and negatives can distort scale-free network analysis, particularly in biological data. Robust estimators are recommended for accurate scale parameter estimation in protein interaction networks.

More Related Videos

Statistical Modelling of Cortical Connectivity Using Non-invasive Electroencephalograms
08:51

Statistical Modelling of Cortical Connectivity Using Non-invasive Electroencephalograms

Published on: November 1, 2019

Modeling the Functional Network for Spatial Navigation in the Human Brain
05:55

Modeling the Functional Network for Spatial Navigation in the Human Brain

Published on: October 13, 2023

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 17, 2026

Closed-loop Neuro-robotic Experiments to Test Computational Properties of Neuronal Networks
11:18

Closed-loop Neuro-robotic Experiments to Test Computational Properties of Neuronal Networks

Published on: March 2, 2015

Statistical Modelling of Cortical Connectivity Using Non-invasive Electroencephalograms
08:51

Statistical Modelling of Cortical Connectivity Using Non-invasive Electroencephalograms

Published on: November 1, 2019

Modeling the Functional Network for Spatial Navigation in the Human Brain
05:55

Modeling the Functional Network for Spatial Navigation in the Human Brain

Published on: October 13, 2023

Area of Science:

  • Network science
  • Systems biology
  • Bioinformatics

Background:

  • Scale-free networks are common in complex systems, including biological networks.
  • Existing studies often overlook false positive and false negative links in network data.
  • Measurement errors significantly impact the topological inference of biological networks.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the impact of erroneous links on network topological inference.
  • To explore error mechanisms in scale-free networks, focusing on yeast protein interaction networks.
  • To identify robust methods for estimating network parameters in the presence of errors.

Main Methods:

  • Theoretical derivations and simulations were employed to analyze network topology.
  • Comparison of real yeast protein interaction data with simulated data to understand error mechanisms.
  • Evaluation of different robust estimators for scale parameter estimation.

Main Results:

  • Ignoring erroneous links can bias scale parameter estimates; robust estimators are recommended.
  • Scale-free property holds for mid-range connectivities but is distorted at low/high connectivities with errors.
  • Different error mechanisms (false positives/negatives) affect yeast protein interaction networks from various data sources.

Conclusions:

  • Robust estimators, like least trimmed mean squares, are crucial for accurate scale parameter estimation.
  • The scale-free property's robustness varies depending on the error mechanism.
  • Yeast protein interaction networks exhibit distinct error profiles (e.g., high false negatives in MIPS, variable rates in yeast two-hybrid data).