Identification of deleterious synonymous variants in human genomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: The prioritization and identification of disease-causing mutations is one of the most significant challenges in medical genomics. Currently available methods address this problem for non-synonymous single nucleotide variants (SNVs) and variation in promoters/enhancers; however, recent research has implicated synonymous (silent) exonic mutations in a number of disorders. RESULTS: We have curated 33 such variants from literature and developed the Silent Variant Analyzer (SilVA), a machine-learning approach to separate these from among a large set of rare polymorphisms. We evaluate SilVA's performance on in silico 'infection' experiments, in which we implant known disease-causing mutations into a human genome, and show that for 15 of 33 disorders, we rank the implanted mutation among the top five most deleterious ones. Furthermore, we apply the SilVA method to two additional datasets: synonymous variants associated with Meckel syndrome, and a collection of silent variants clinically observed and stratified by a molecular diagnostics laboratory, and show that SilVA is able to accurately predict the harmfulness of silent variants in these datasets. AVAILABILITY: SilVA is open source and is freely available from the project website: http://compbio.cs.toronto.edu/silva CONTACT: silva-snv@cs.toronto.edu SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".