A non-negative matrix factorization framework for identifying modular patterns in metagenomic profile data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metagenomic studies sequence DNA directly from environmental samples to explore the structure and function of complex microbial and viral communities. Individual, short pieces of sequenced DNA ("reads") are classified into (putative) taxonomic or metabolic groups which are analyzed for patterns across samples. Analysis of such read matrices is at the core of using metagenomic data to make inferences about ecosystem structure and function. Non-negative matrix factorization (NMF) is a numerical technique for approximating high-dimensional data points as positive linear combinations of positive components. It is thus well suited to interpretation of observed samples as combinations of different components. We develop, test and apply an NMF-based framework to analyze metagenomic read matrices. In particular, we introduce a method for choosing NMF degree in the presence of overlap, and apply spectral-reordering techniques to NMF-based similarity matrices to aid visualization. We show that our method can robustly identify the appropriate degree and disentangle overlapping contributions using synthetic data sets. We then examine and discuss the NMF decomposition of a metabolic profile matrix extracted from 39 publicly available metagenomic samples, and identify canonical sample types, including one associated with coral ecosystems, one associated with highly saline ecosystems and others. We also identify specific associations between pathways and canonical environments, and explore how alternative choices of decompositions facilitate analysis of read matrices at a finer scale.
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 | 0.008 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".