MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Flexible and Powerful Bayesian Hierarchical Model for ChIP–Chip Experiments

2007· article· en· W2009860000 on OpenAlex
Raphaël Gottardo, Wei Li, W. Evan Johnson, X. Shirley Liu

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
FundersNational Human Genome Research Institute
KeywordsChipBayesian probabilityComputer scienceBayesian hierarchical modelingHierarchical database modelBayesian inferenceArtificial intelligenceData miningTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chromatin-immunoprecipitation microarrays (ChIP-chip) that enable researchers to identify regions of a given genome that are bound by specific DNA-binding proteins present new challenges for statistical analysis due to the large number of probes, the high noise-to-signal ratio, and the spatial dependence between probes. We propose a method called BAC (Bayesian analysis of ChIP-chip) to detect transcription factor bound regions, which incorporate the dependence between probes while making little assumptions about the bound regions (e.g., length). BAC is robust to probe outliers with an exchangeable prior for the variances, which allows different variances for the probes but still shrink extreme empirical variances. Parameter estimation is carried out using Markov chain Monte Carlo and inference is based on the joint distribution of the parameters. Bound regions are detected using posterior probabilities computed from the joint posterior distribution of neighboring probes. We show that these posterior probabilities are well calibrated and can be used to obtain an estimate of the false discovery rate. The method is illustrated using two publicly available ChIP-chip data sets containing 18 experimentally validated regions. We compare our method to four other baseline and commonly used techniques, namely, the Wilcoxon's rank sum test, TileMap, HGMM, and MAT. We found BAC and HGMM to perform best at detecting validated regions. However, HGMM appears to be very sensitive to probe outliers compared to BAC. In addition, we present a simulation study, which shows that BAC is more powerful than the other four techniques under various simulation scenarios while being robust to model misspecification.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.696
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it