Multiple gene expression profile alignment for microarray time-series data clustering
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Clustering gene expression data given in terms of time-series is a challenging problem that imposes its own particular constraints. Traditional clustering methods based on conventional similarity measures are not always suitable for clustering time-series data. A few methods have been proposed recently for clustering microarray time-series, which take the temporal dimension of the data into account. The inherent principle behind these methods is to either define a similarity measure appropriate for temporal expression data, or pre-process the data in such a way that the temporal relationships between and within the time-series are considered during the subsequent clustering phase. RESULTS: We introduce pairwise gene expression profile alignment, which vertically shifts two profiles in such a way that the area between their corresponding curves is minimal. Based on the pairwise alignment operation, we define a new distance function that is appropriate for time-series profiles. We also introduce a new clustering method that involves multiple expression profile alignment, which generalizes pairwise alignment to a set of profiles. Extensive experiments on well-known datasets yield encouraging results of at least 80% classification accuracy.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it