Yeast Phenomics: An Experimental Approach for Modeling Gene Interaction Networks that Buffer Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The genome project increased appreciation of genetic complexity underlying disease phenotypes: many genes contribute each phenotype and each gene contributes multiple phenotypes. The aspiration of predicting common disease in individuals has evolved from seeking primary loci to marginal risk assignments based on many genes. Genetic interaction, defined as contributions to a phenotype that are dependent upon particular digenic allele combinations, could improve prediction of phenotype from complex genotype, but it is difficult to study in human populations. High throughput, systematic analysis of S. cerevisiae gene knockouts or knockdowns in the context of disease-relevant phenotypic perturbations provides a tractable experimental approach to derive gene interaction networks, in order to deduce by cross-species gene homology how phenotype is buffered against disease-risk genotypes. Yeast gene interaction network analysis to date has revealed biology more complex than previously imagined. This has motivated the development of more powerful yeast cell array phenotyping methods to globally model the role of gene interaction networks in modulating phenotypes (which we call yeast phenomic analysis). The article illustrates yeast phenomic technology, which is applied here to quantify gene X media interaction at higher resolution and supports use of a human-like media for future applications of yeast phenomics for modeling human disease.
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".