Principal Components of Heritability for High Dimension Quantitative Traits and General Pedigrees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For many complex disorders, genetically relevant disease definition is still unclear. For this reason, researchers tend to collect large numbers of items related directly or indirectly to the disease diagnostic. Since the measured traits may not be all influenced by genetic factors, researchers are faced with the problem of choosing which traits or combinations of traits to consider in linkage analysis. To combine items, one can subject the data to a principal component analysis. However, when family date are collected, principal component analysis does not take family structure into account. In order to deal with these issues, Ott & Rabinowitz (1999) introduced the principal components of heritability (PCH), which capture the familial information across traits by calculating linear combinations of traits that maximize heritability. The calculation of the PCHs is based on the estimation of the genetic and the environmental components of variance. In the genetic context, the standard estimators of the variance components are Lange's maximum likelihood estimators, which require complex numerical calculations. The objectives of this paper are the following: i) to review some standard strategies available in the literature to estimate variance components for unbalanced data in mixed models; ii) to propose an ANOVA method for a genetic random effect model to estimate the variance components, which can be applied to general pedigrees and high dimensional family data within the PCH framework; iii) to elucidate the connection between PCH analysis and Linear Discriminant Analysis. We use computer simulations to show that the proposed method has similar asymptotic properties as Lange's method when the number of traits is small, and we study the efficiency of our method when the number of traits is large. A data analysis involving schizophrenia and bipolar quantitative traits is finally presented to illustrate the PCH methodology.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".