Two‐Phase Stratified Sampling Designs for Regional Sequencing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By systematic examination of common tag single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) across the genome, the genome-wide association study (GWAS) has proven to be a successful approach to identify genetic variants that are associated with complex diseases and traits. Although the per base pair cost of sequencing has dropped dramatically with the advent of the next-generation technologies, it may still only be feasible to obtain DNA sequence data for a portion of available study subjects due to financial constraints. Two-phase sampling designs have been used frequently in large-scale surveys and epidemiological studies where certain variables are too costly to be measured on all subjects. We consider two-phase stratified sampling designs for genetic association, in which tag SNPs for candidate genes or regions are genotyped on all subjects in phase 1, and a proportion of subjects are selected into phase 2 based on genotypes at one or more tag SNPs. Deep sequencing in the region is then applied to genotype phase 2 subjects at sequence SNPs. We investigate alternative sampling designs for selection of phase 2 subjects within strata defined by tag SNP genotypes and develop methods of inference for sequence SNP variant associations using data from both phases. In comparison to methods that use data from phase 2 alone, the combined analysis improves efficiency.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".