Annarita D'Addabbo

Dr. Annarita D'Addabbo

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

26Years (2001-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
9 March 2016 in IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ADAnnarita D'Addabbo
Annarita D'Addabbo
Alberto ReficeAlberto Refice
Alberto Refice
GPGuido Pasquariello
Guido Pasquariello
FLfrancesco paolo lovergine
francesco paolo lovergine
DCDomenico capolongo
Domenico capolongo
Salvatore ManfredaSalvatore Manfreda
Salvatore Manfreda
Accurate flood mapping is important for both planning activities during emergencies and as a support for the successive assessment of damaged areas. A valuable information source for such a procedure can be remote sensing synthetic aperture radar (SAR) imagery. However, flood scenarios are typical examples of complex situations in which different factors have to be considered to provide accurate and robust interpretation of the situation on the ground. For this reason, a data fusion approach of remote sensing data with ancillary information can be particularly useful. In this paper, a Bayesian network is proposed to integrate remotely sensed data, such as multitemporal SAR intensity images and interferometric-SAR coherence data, with geomorphic and other ground information. The methodology is tested on a case study regarding a flood that occurred in the Basilicata region (Italy) on December 2013, monitored using a time series of COSMO-SkyMed data. It is shown that the synergetic use of different information layers can help to detect more precisely the areas affected by the flood, reducing false alarms and missed identifications which may affect algorithms based on data from a single source. The produced flood maps are compared to data obtained independently from the analysis of optical images; the comparison indicates that the proposed methodology is able to reliably follow the temporal evolution of the phenomenon, assigning high probability to areas most likely to be flooded, in spite of their heterogeneous temporal SAR/InSAR signatures, reaching accuracies of up to 89%.

2 September 2009 in BMC Bioinformatics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
LALuca Abatangelo
Luca Abatangelo
RMRosalia Maglietta
Rosalia Maglietta
ADAngela Distaso
Angela Distaso
ADAnnarita D'Addabbo
Annarita D'Addabbo
TCTeresa Maria Creanza
Teresa Maria Creanza
NANicola Ancona
Nicola Ancona
Background: The analysis of high-throughput gene expression data with respect to sets of genes rather than individual genes has many advantages. A variety of methods have been developed for assessing the enrichment of sets of genes with respect to differential expression. In this paper we provide a comparative study of four of these methods: Fisher's exact test, Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA), Random-Sets (RS), and Gene List Analysis with Prediction Accuracy (GLAPA). The first three methods use associative statistics, while the fourth uses predictive statistics. We first compare all four methods on simulated data sets to verify that Fisher's exact test is markedly worse than the other three approaches. We then validate the other three methods on seven real data sets with known genetic perturbations and then compare the methods on two cancer data sets where our a priori knowledge is limited. Results: The simulation study highlights that none of the three method outperforms all others consistently. GSEA and RS are able to detect weak signals of deregulation and they perform differently when genes in a gene set are both differentially up and down regulated. GLAPA is more conservative and large differences between the two phenotypes are required to allow the method to detect differential deregulation in gene sets. This is due to the fact that the enrichment statistic in GLAPA is prediction error which is a stronger criteria than classical two sample statistic as used in RS and GSEA. This was reflected in the analysis on real data sets as GSEA and RS were seen to be significant for particular gene sets while GLAPA was not, suggesting a small effect size. We find that the rank of gene set enrichment induced by GLAPA is more similar to RS than GSEA. More importantly, the rankings of the three methods share significant overlap. Conclusion: The three methods considered in our study recover relevant gene sets known to be deregulated in the experimental conditions and pathologies analyzed. There are differences between the three methods and GSEA seems to be more consistent in finding enriched gene sets, although no method uniformly dominates over all data sets. Our analysis highlights the deep difference existing between associative and predictive methods for detecting enrichment and the use of both to better interpret results of pathway analysis. We close with suggestions for users of gene set methods.

1 July 2019 in Science of The Total Environment
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Marina ZingaroMarina Zingaro
Marina Zingaro
Alberto ReficeAlberto Refice
Alberto Refice
EGEmanuele Giachetta
Emanuele Giachetta
ADAnnarita D'Addabbo
Annarita D'Addabbo
FLFrancesco Lovergine
Francesco Lovergine
DCDomenico capolongo
Domenico capolongo

19 August 2006 in BMC Bioinformatics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
NAN Ancona
N Ancona
RMRosalia Maglietta
Rosalia Maglietta
APAda Piepoli
Ada Piepoli
ADAnnarita D'Addabbo
Annarita D'Addabbo
RCRosa Cotugno
Rosa Cotugno
FPFrancesco Perri
Francesco Perri
In this paper we present a method for the statistical assessment of cancer predictors which make use of gene expression profiles. The methodology is applied to a new data set of microarray gene expression data collected in Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza Hospital, Foggia--Italy. The data set is made up of normal (22) and tumor (25) specimens extracted from 25 patients affected by colon cancer. We propose to give answers to some questions which are relevant for the automatic diagnosis of cancer such as: Is the size of the available data set sufficient to build accurate classifiers? What is the statistical significance of the associated error rates? In what ways can accuracy be considered dependant on the adopted classification scheme? How many genes are correlated with the pathology and how many are sufficient for an accurate colon cancer classification? The method we propose answers these questions whilst avoiding the potential pitfalls hidden in the analysis and interpretation of microarray data. We estimate the generalization error, evaluated through the Leave-K-Out Cross Validation error, for three different classification schemes by varying the number of training examples and the number of the genes used. The statistical significance of the error rate is measured by using a permutation test. We provide a statistical analysis in terms of the frequencies of the genes involved in the classification. Using the whole set of genes, we found that the Weighted Voting Algorithm (WVA) classifier learns the distinction between normal and tumor specimens with 25 training examples, providing e = 21% (p = 0.045) as an error rate. This remains constant even when the number of examples increases. Moreover, Regularized Least Squares (RLS) and Support Vector Machines (SVM) classifiers can learn with only 15 training examples, with an error rate of e = 19% (p = 0.035) and e = 18% (p = 0.037) respectively. Moreover, the error rate decreases as the training set size increases, reaching its best performances with 35 training examples. In this case, RLS and SVM have error rates of e = 14% (p = 0.027) and e = 11% (p = 0.019). Concerning the number of genes, we found about 6000 genes (p < 0.05) correlated with the pathology, resulting from the signal-to-noise statistic. Moreover the performances of RLS and SVM classifiers do not change when 74% of genes is used. They progressively reduce up to e = 16% (p < 0.05) when only 2 genes are employed. The biological relevance of a set of genes determined by our statistical analysis and the major roles they play in colorectal tumorigenesis is discussed. The method proposed provides statistically significant answers to precise questions relevant for the diagnosis and prognosis of cancer. We found that, with as few as 15 examples, it is possible to train statistically significant classifiers for colon cancer diagnosis. As for the definition of the number of genes sufficient for a reliable classification of colon cancer, our results suggest that it depends on the accuracy required.

1 September 2015 in Pattern Recognition Letters
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ADAnnarita D'Addabbo
Annarita D'Addabbo
RMRosalia Maglietta
Rosalia Maglietta
Several applications aim to identify rare events from very large data sets. Classification algorithms may present great limitations on large data sets and show a performance degradation due to class imbalance. Many solutions have been presented in literature to deal with the problem of huge amount of data or imbalancing separately. In this paper we assessed the performances of a novel method, Parallel Selective Sampling (PSS), able to select data from the majority class to reduce imbalance in large data sets. PSS was combined with the Support Vector Machine (SVM) classification. PSS-SVM showed excellent performances on synthetic data sets, much better than SVM. Moreover, we showed that on real data sets PSS-SVM classifiers had performances slightly better than those of SVM and RUSBoost classifiers with reduced processing times. In fact, the proposed strategy was conceived and designed for parallel and distributed computing. In conclusion, PSS-SVM is a valuable alternative to SVM and RUSBoost for the problem of classification by huge and imbalanced data, due to its accurate statistical predictions and low computational complexity

1 February 2019 in Science of The Total Environment
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DCDomenico capolongo
Domenico capolongo
Alberto ReficeAlberto Refice
Alberto Refice
DBD. Bocchiola
D. Bocchiola
ADAnnarita D'Addabbo
Annarita D'Addabbo
KVK. Vouvalidis
K. Vouvalidis
LSL. Stamatopoulos
L. Stamatopoulos