Accurate and reliable high-throughput detection of copy number variation in the human genome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study describes a new tool for accurate and reliable high-throughput detection of copy number variation in the human genome. We have constructed a large-insert clone DNA microarray covering the entire human genome in tiling path resolution that we have used to identify copy number variation in human populations. Crucial to this study has been the development of a robust array platform and analytic process for the automated identification of copy number variants (CNVs). The array consists of 26,574 clones covering 93.7% of euchromatic regions. Clones were selected primarily from the published "Golden Path," and mapping was confirmed by fingerprinting and BAC-end sequencing. Array performance was extensively tested by a series of validation assays. These included determining the hybridization characteristics of each individual clone on the array by chromosome-specific add-in experiments. Estimation of data reproducibility and false-positive/negative rates was carried out using self-self hybridizations, replicate experiments, and independent validations of CNVs. Based on these studies, we developed a variance-based automatic copy number detection analysis process (CNVfinder) and have demonstrated its robustness by comparison with the SW-ARRAY method.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".