A rare variant association test in family‐based designs and non‐normal quantitative traits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rare variant studies are now being used to characterize the genetic diversity between individuals and may help to identify substantial amounts of the genetic variation of complex diseases and quantitative phenotypes. Family data have been shown to be powerful to interrogate rare variants. Consequently, several rare variants association tests have been recently developed for family-based designs, but typically, these assume the normality of the quantitative phenotypes. In this paper, we present a family-based test for rare-variants association in the presence of non-normal quantitative phenotypes. The proposed model relaxes the normality assumption and does not specify any parametric distribution for the marginal distribution of the phenotype. The dependence between relatives is modeled via a Gaussian copula. A score-type test is derived, and several strategies to approximate its distribution under the null hypothesis are derived and investigated. The performance of the proposed test is assessed and compared with existing methods by simulations. The methodology is illustrated with an association study involving the adiponectin trait from the UK10K project.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".