Joint Identification of Multiple Genetic Variants via Elastic‐Net Variable Selection in a Genome‐Wide Association Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unraveling the genetic background of common complex traits is a major goal in modern genetics. In recent years, genome-wide association (GWA) studies have been conducted with large-scale data sets of genetic variants. Most of those studies have relied on single-marker approaches that identify single genetic factors individually and can be limited in considering fully the joint effects of multiple genetic factors on complex traits. Joint identification of multiple genetic factors would be more powerful and would provide better prediction on complex traits since it utilizes combined information across variants. Here we propose a multi-stage approach for GWA analysis: (1) prescreening, (2) joint identification of putative SNPs based on elastic-net variable selection, and (3) empirical replication using bootstrap samples. Our approach enables an efficient joint search for genetic associations in GWA analysis. The suggested empirical replication method can be beneficial in GWA studies because one can avoid a costly, independent replication study while eliminating false-positive associations and focusing on a smaller number of replicable variants. We applied the proposed approach to a GWA analysis, and jointly identified 129 genetic variants having an association with adult height in a Korean population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".