Sample A: Cover Page of Thesis, Project, or Dissertation Proposal

data. Classification is continued with the same models, using ProbeSet values from the probe
cleansing methods, comparing the 325 DE BaFL ProbeSets to the authors’ lists.
Figure 3.5: Candidate lists- Bhattacharjee predict Stearman. The genes from the original authors’ papers
proposed significant ProbeSet lists, further limited by those that met the BaFL cleansing criteria but not the
Welch’s t-test significance criterion, with ProbeSet values provided by one of the three data cleansing
methods: these values were used as input to the three classifier models. Here training of the model used the
(modified) Bhattacharjee ProbeSet list and testing was done using the Stearman data. Each graph shows
the number of the ProbeSet value-generation method on the y-axis (described below) and the cumulative
AUC value on the x-axis. Each row of graphs shows outcomes for a particular initial candidate ProbeSet
list. Each column of graphs shows the results for a particular classifier, indicated in the graph. The red line
highlights the 0.9 cumulative AUC. In this case the node indicates average AUC and the bars show the
standard deviation for 100 random sampling with replacement repetitions. The final column summarizes
each cleansing model’s list interpretation, across the 3 classification algorithms. The final row of graphs
summarizes the individual algorithms, per cleansing methodology, across all four 4 candidate lists and
follows the same color scheme.
82