Influence of Prior Knowledge in Constraint-Based Learning of Gene Regulatory Networks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Constraint-based structure learning algorithms generally perform well on sparse graphs. Although sparsity is not uncommon, there are some domains where the underlying graph can have some dense regions; one of these domains is gene regulatory networks, which is the main motivation to undertake the study described in this paper. We propose a new constraint-based algorithm that can both increase the quality of output and decrease the computational requirements for learning the structure of gene regulatory networks. The algorithm is based on and extends the PC algorithm. Two different types of information are derived from the prior knowledge; one is the probability of existence of edges, and the other is the nodes that seem to be dependent on a large number of nodes compared to other nodes in the graph. Also a new method based on Gene Ontology for gene regulatory network validation is proposed. We demonstrate the applicability and effectiveness of the proposed algorithms on both synthetic and real data sets.
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.
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 it