Statistical mixture modeling for cell subtype identification in flow cytometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Statistical mixture modeling provides an opportunity for automated identification and resolution of cell subtypes in flow cytometric data. The configuration of cells as represented by multiple markers simultaneously can be modeled arbitrarily well as a mixture of Gaussian distributions in the dimension of the number of markers. Cellular subtypes may be related to one or multiple components of such mixtures, and fitted mixture models can be evaluated in the full set of markers as an alternative, or adjunct, to traditional subjective gating methods that rely on choosing one or two dimensions. Four color flow data from human blood cells labeled with FITC-conjugated anti-CD3, PE-conjugated anti-CD8, PE-Cy5-conjugated anti-CD4, and APC-conjugated anti-CD19 Abs was acquired on a FACSCalibur. Cells from four murine cell lines, JAWS II, RAW 264.7, CTLL-2, and A20, were also stained with FITC-conjugated anti-CD11c, PE-conjugated anti-CD11b, PE-Cy5-conjugated anti-CD8a, and PE-Cy7-conjugated-CD45R/B220 Abs, respectively, and single color flow data were collected on an LSRII. The data were fitted with a mixture of multivariate Gaussians using standard Bayesian statistical approaches and Markov chain Monte Carlo computations. Statistical mixture models were able to identify and purify major cell subsets in human peripheral blood, using an automated process that can be generalized to an arbitrary number of markers. Validation against both traditional expert gating and synthetic mixtures of murine cell lines with known mixing proportions was also performed. This article describes the studies of statistical mixture modeling of flow cytometric data, and demonstrates their utility in examples with four-color flow data from human peripheral blood samples and synthetic mixtures of murine cell lines.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".