Opposite effects on facial morphology due to gene dosage sensitivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sequencing technology is increasingly demonstrating the impact of genomic copy number variation (CNV) on phenotypes. Opposing variation in growth, head size, cognition and behaviour is known to result from deletions and reciprocal duplications of some genomic regions. We propose normative inversion of face shape, opposing difference from a matched norm, as a basis for investigating the effects of gene dosage on craniofacial development. We use dense surface modelling techniques to match any face (or part of a face) to a facial norm of unaffected individuals of matched age, sex and ethnicity and then we reverse the individual's face shape differences from the matched norm to produce the normative inversion. We demonstrate for five genomic regions, 4p16.3, 7q11.23, 11p15, 16p13.3 and 17p11.2, that such inversion for individuals with a duplication or (epi)-mutation produces facial forms remarkably similar to those associated with a deletion or opposite (epi-)mutation of the same region, and vice versa. The ability to visualise and quantify face shape effects of gene dosage is of major benefit for determining whether a CNV is the cause of the phenotype of an individual and for predicting reciprocal consequences. It enables face shape to be used as a relatively simple and inexpensive functional analysis of the gene(s) involved.
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".