Relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis classification using elastic net logistic regression on gene expression data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As part of the first Industrial Methodology for Process Verification in Research Challenge, the aim of the MS Diagnostic sub-challenge was to identify a robust diagnostic signature for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis from gene expression data. In this regard, we built a classifier that discriminates samples into two phenotype groups, either RRMS or controls, using the transcriptome of peripheral blood mononuclear cells. For our classifier, we used logistic regression with elastic net regression as implemented in the glmnet package in R. We selected the values of the regularization hyper-parameters using cross-validation performance on the provided training data, number of non-zero parameters in our model, and based on the distribution of output values when the input vector for the test data were used with our classifier. We analyzed our classifier performance with two different strategies for feature extraction, using either only genes or including additional constructed features from gene pathways data. The two different strategies produced little differences in performance when comparing the 10-fold cross-validation of the training data and prediction on the test data. Our final submission for the sub-challenge used only genes as features, and identified a diagnostic signature consisting of 58 genes, that was ranked second out of a total of 39 submissions.
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 | 0.001 | 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".