4.8 Review

Advancing Computational Toxicology by Interpretable Machine Learning

期刊

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.3c00653

关键词

Machine learning; Interpretable modeling; Computationaltoxicology; Risk assessment; Systems toxicology; Adverse outcome pathway

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chemical toxicity evaluations have critical impact on human health. Computational toxicology utilizing machine learning and deep learning techniques is a promising alternative approach. However, many toxicity models are difficult to interpret, which hampers their use in chemical risk assessments.
Chemical toxicityevaluations for drugs, consumer products, andenvironmental chemicals have a critical impact on human health. Traditionalanimal models to evaluate chemical toxicity are expensive, time-consuming,and often fail to detect toxicants in humans. Computational toxicologyis a promising alternative approach that utilizes machine learning(ML) and deep learning (DL) techniques to predict the toxicity potentialsof chemicals. Although the applications of ML- and DL-based computationalmodels in chemical toxicity predictions are attractive, many toxicitymodels are black boxes in nature and difficult tointerpret by toxicologists, which hampers the chemical risk assessmentsusing these models. The recent progress of interpretable ML (IML)in the computer science field meets this urgent need to unveil theunderlying toxicity mechanisms and elucidate the domain knowledgeof toxicity models. In this review, we focused on the applicationsof IML in computational toxicology, including toxicity feature data,model interpretation methods, use of knowledge base frameworks inIML development, and recent applications. The challenges and futuredirections of IML modeling in toxicology are also discussed. We hopethis review can encourage efforts in developing interpretable modelswith new IML algorithms that can assist new chemical assessments byillustrating toxicity mechanisms in humans.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据