Flexible analysis of RNA-seq data using mixed effects models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Most methods for estimating differential expression from RNA-seq are based on statistics that compare normalized read counts between treatment classes. Unfortunately, reads are in general too short to be mapped unambiguously to features of interest, such as genes, isoforms or haplotype-specific isoforms. There are methods for estimating expression levels that account for this source of ambiguity. However, the uncertainty is not generally accounted for in downstream analysis of gene expression experiments. Moreover, at the individual transcript level, it can sometimes be too large to allow useful comparisons between treatment groups. RESULTS: In this article we make two proposals that improve the power, specificity and versatility of expression analysis using RNA-seq data. First, we present a Bayesian method for model selection that accounts for read mapping ambiguities using random effects. This polytomous model selection approach can be used to identify many interesting patterns of gene expression and is not confined to detecting differential expression between two groups. For illustration, we use our method to detect imprinting, different types of regulatory divergence in cis and in trans and differential isoform usage, but many other applications are possible. Second, we present a novel collapsing algorithm for grouping transcripts into inferential units that exploits the posterior correlation between transcript expression levels. The aggregate expression levels of these units can be estimated with useful levels of uncertainty. Our algorithm can improve the precision of expression estimates when uncertainty is large with only a small reduction in biological resolution. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: We have implemented our software in the mmdiff and mmcollapse multithreaded C++ programs as part of the open-source MMSEQ package, available on https://github.com/eturro/mmseq.
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 | 0.012 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".