MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166894188 · doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2015.09.005

Imputation of KIR Types from SNP Variation Data

2015· article· en· W2166894188 on OpenAlexaff
Damjan Vukcevic, James A. Traherne, Sigrid Næss, Eva Ellinghaus, Alexander Dilthey, Mark Lathrop, Tom H. Karlsen, André Franke, Miriam F. Moffatt, William Cookson, John Trowsdale, Gil McVean, Stephen Sawcer, Stephen Leslie

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Human Genetics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Cell Function and Interaction
Canadian institutionsMcGill University and Génome Québec Innovation Centre
FundersCambridge Institute for Medical Research, University of CambridgeWellcome Trust
KeywordsHuman leukocyte antigenImputation (statistics)BiologySNPPopulationGeneticsGenome-wide association studyImmunologyComputational biologyTypingSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGeneAntigenGenotypeMedicineMissing dataComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large population studies of immune system genes are essential for characterizing their role in diseases, including autoimmune conditions. Of key interest are a group of genes encoding the killer cell immunoglobulin-like receptors (KIRs), which have known and hypothesized roles in autoimmune diseases, resistance to viruses, reproductive conditions, and cancer. These genes are highly polymorphic, which makes typing expensive and time consuming. Consequently, despite their importance, KIRs have been little studied in large cohorts. Statistical imputation methods developed for other complex loci (e.g., human leukocyte antigen [HLA]) on the basis of SNP data provide an inexpensive high-throughput alternative to direct laboratory typing of these loci and have enabled important findings and insights for many diseases. We present KIR∗IMP, a method for imputation of KIR copy number. We show that KIR∗IMP is highly accurate and thus allows the study of KIRs in large cohorts and enables detailed investigation of the role of KIRs in human disease.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.509
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations82
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Human GeneticsSame topicImmune Cell Function and InteractionFrench-language works237,207