A Note on the Efficiencies of Sampling Strategies in Two‐Stage Bayesian Regional Fine Mapping of a Quantitative Trait
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In focused studies designed to follow up associations detected in a genome-wide association study (GWAS), investigators can proceed to fine-map a genomic region by targeted sequencing or dense genotyping of all variants in the region, aiming to identify a functional sequence variant. For the analysis of a quantitative trait, we consider a Bayesian approach to fine-mapping study design that incorporates stratification according to a promising GWAS tag SNP in the same region. Improved cost-efficiency can be achieved when the fine-mapping phase incorporates a two-stage design, with identification of a smaller set of more promising variants in a subsample taken in stage 1, followed by their evaluation in an independent stage 2 subsample. To avoid the potential negative impact of genetic model misspecification on inference we incorporate genetic model selection based on posterior probabilities for each competing model. Our simulation study shows that, compared to simple random sampling that ignores genetic information from GWAS, tag-SNP-based stratified sample allocation methods reduce the number of variants continuing to stage 2 and are more likely to promote the functional sequence variant into confirmation studies.
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 | 0.129 | 0.294 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".