Modeling recurrent DNA copy number alterations in array CGH data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Recurrent DNA copy number alterations (CNA) measured with array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) reveal important molecular features of human genetics and disease. Studying aCGH profiles from a phenotypic group of individuals can determine important recurrent CNA patterns that suggest a strong correlation to the phenotype. Computational approaches to detecting recurrent CNAs from a set of aCGH experiments have typically relied on discretizing the noisy log ratios and subsequently inferring patterns. We demonstrate that this can have the effect of filtering out important signals present in the raw data. In this article we develop statistical models that jointly infer CNA patterns and the discrete labels by borrowing statistical strength across samples. RESULTS: We propose extending single sample aCGH HMMs to the multiple sample case in order to infer shared CNAs. We model recurrent CNAs as a profile encoded by a master sequence of states that generates the samples. We show how to improve on two basic models by performing joint inference of the discrete labels and providing sparsity in the output. We demonstrate on synthetic ground truth data and real data from lung cancer cell lines how these two important features of our model improve results over baseline models. We include standard quantitative metrics and a qualitative assessment on which to base our conclusions. AVAILABILITY: http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~sshah/acgh.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".