A Comparative Analysis of Biomarker Selection Techniques

<table class="table-group" width="800px"><tr class="fig-image" id="a"><td><img alt="387673.fig.005a" src="https://static.hindawi.com/articles/bmri/volume-2013/387673/figures/387673.fig.005a.jpg"/></td></tr><tr class="fig-caption"><td align="center"><table><tr><td><b>(a) </b>Univariate ranking methods</td></tr></table></td></tr><tr class="fig-image" id="b"><td><img alt="387673.fig.005b" src="https://static.hindawi.com/articles/bmri/volume-2013/387673/figures/387673.fig.005b.jpg"/></td></tr><tr class="fig-caption"><td align="center"><table><tr><td><b>(b) </b>Multivariate ranking methods</td></tr></table></td></tr></table>

<table><i>Prostate </i>dataset: stability versus number of genes.</table>

BioMed Research International

fig5

Figure 5

Figure 5: A Comparative Analysis of Biomarker Selection Techniques 