Model-based clustering of microarray expression data via latent Gaussian mixture models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: In recent years, work has been carried out on clustering gene expression microarray data. Some approaches are developed from an algorithmic viewpoint whereas others are developed via the application of mixture models. In this article, a family of eight mixture models which utilizes the factor analysis covariance structure is extended to 12 models and applied to gene expression microarray data. This modelling approach builds on previous work by introducing a modified factor analysis covariance structure, leading to a family of 12 mixture models, including parsimonious models. This family of models allows for the modelling of the correlation between gene expression levels even when the number of samples is small. Parameter estimation is carried out using a variant of the expectation-maximization algorithm and model selection is achieved using the Bayesian information criterion. This expanded family of Gaussian mixture models, known as the expanded parsimonious Gaussian mixture model (EPGMM) family, is then applied to two well-known gene expression data sets. RESULTS: The performance of the EPGMM family of models is quantified using the adjusted Rand index. This family of models gives very good performance, relative to existing popular clustering techniques, when applied to real gene expression microarray data. AVAILABILITY: The reduced, preprocessed data that were analysed are available at www.paulmcnicholas.info
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
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".