MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1489518784 · doi:10.2202/1544-6115.1298

A Composite-Conditional-Likelihood Approach for Gene Mapping Based on Linkage Disequilibrium in Windows of Marker Loci

2008· article· en· W1489518784 on OpenAlexaff
Fabrice Larribe, Sabin Lessard

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinkage disequilibriumGeneticsLocus (genetics)BiologySingle-nucleotide polymorphismAssociation mappingGenetic markerHaplotypeStatisticsMathematicsAlgorithmAlleleGeneGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A composite-conditional-likelihood (CCL) approach is proposed to map the position of a trait-influencing mutation (TIM) using the ancestral recombination graph (ARG) and importance sampling to reconstruct the genealogy of DNA sequences with respect to windows of marker loci and predict the linkage disequilibrium pattern observed in a sample of cases and controls. The method is designed to fine-map the location of a disease mutation, not as an association study. The CCL function proposed for the position of the TIM is a weighted product of conditional likelihood functions for windows of a given number of marker loci that encompass the TIM locus, given the sample configuration at the marker loci in those windows. A rare recessive allele is assumed for the TIM and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are considered as markers. The method is applied to a range of simulated data sets. Not only do the CCL profiles converge more rapidly with smaller window sizes as the number of simulated histories of the sampled sequences increases, but the maximum-likelihood estimates for the position of the TIM remain as satisfactory, while requiring significantly less computing time. The simulations also suggest that non-random samples, more precisely, a non-proportional number of controls versus the number of cases, has little effect on the estimation procedure as well as sample size and marker density beyond some threshold values. Moreover, when compared with some other recent methods under the same assumptions, the CCL approach proves to be competitive.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.684
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular BiologySame topicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and AnimalsFrench-language works237,207