Principal component of explained variance: an efficient and optimal data dimension reduction framework for association studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The genomics era has led to an increase in the dimensionality of the data collected to investigate biological questions. In this context, dimension-reduction techniques can be used to summarize high-dimensional signals into low-dimensional ones, to further test for association with one or more covariates of interest. This paper revisits one such approach, previously known as Principal Component of Heritability and renamed here as Principal Component of Explained Variance (PCEV). As its name suggests, the PCEV seeks a linear combination of outcomes in an optimal manner, by maximising the proportion of variance explained by one or several covariates of interest. By construction, this method optimises power but limited by its computational complexity, it has unfortunately received little attention in the past. Here, we propose a general analytical PCEV framework that builds on the assets of the original method, i.e. conceptually simple and free of tuning parameters. Moreover, our framework extends the range of applications of the original procedure by providing a computationally simple strategy for high-dimensional outcomes, along with exact and asymptotic testing procedures that drastically reduce its computational cost. We investigate the merits of the PCEV using an extensive set of simulations. Furthermore, the use of the PCEV approach will be illustrated using three examples taken from the epigenetics and brain imaging areas.
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 | 0.019 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".