MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

GenXHC: a probabilistic generative model for cross-hybridization compensation in high-density genome-wide microarray data

2005· article· en· W2114368649 on OpenAlexaff
Jiacong Huang, Quaid Morris, Timothy Hughes, Brendan J. Frey

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer applications in the biosciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenerative modelComputer scienceProbabilistic logicGenerative grammarGenomeCompensation (psychology)Computational biologyStatistical modelMicroarrayData miningArtificial intelligenceBiologyGeneticsGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: Microarray designs containing millions to hundreds of millions of probes that tile entire genomes are currently being released. Within the next 2 months, our group will release a microarray data set containing over 12,000,000 microarray measurements taken from 37 mouse tissues. A problem that will become increasingly significant in the upcoming era of genome-wide exon-tiling microarray experiments is the removal of cross-hybridization noise. We present a probabilistic generative model for cross-hybridization in microarray data and a corresponding variational learning method for cross-hybridization compensation, GenXHC, that reduces cross-hybridization noise by taking into account multiple sources for each mRNA expression level measurement, as well as prior knowledge of hybridization similarities between the nucleotide sequences of microarray probes and their target cDNAs. RESULTS: The algorithm is applied to a subset of an exon-resolution genome-wide Agilent microarray data set for chromosome 16 of Mus musculus and is found to produce statistically significant reductions in cross-hybridization noise. The denoised data is found to produce enrichment in multiple gene ontology-biological process (GO-BP) functional groups. The algorithm is found to outperform robust multi-array analysis, another method for cross-hybridization compensation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer applications in the biosciencesSame topicGene expression and cancer classificationFrench-language works237,207