A Composite-Conditional-Likelihood Approach for Gene Mapping Based on Linkage Disequilibrium in Windows of Marker Loci
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.006 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".