Abstract B24: High-dimensional genomic data integration and bias correction using MANCIE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Most genomic and epigenomic experimental data are presented as high-dimensional matrices. Integrative analysis of such high-dimensional genomic data is challenging due to noises and biases in the high-throughput experiments from different platforms. We present MANCIE (Matrix Analysis and Normalization by Concordant Information Enhancement), a computational method for integrating two genomic datasets based on a Bayesian supported principal component analysis (PCA) approach. We demonstrate that data integration using MANCIE can reduce biases and improve the identification of tissue specificity from the Encyclopedia of DNA Elements (ENCODE) data, improve prognostic prediction from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data, and improve the identification of genetic correlation in the Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia (CCLE) data. MANCIE has broad applications in genomic and epigenomic data analysis in cancer research. Citation Format: Chongzhi Zang, Tao Wang, Ke Deng, Bo Li, Sheng'en Hu, Qian Qin, Tengfei Xiao, Shihua Zhang, Clifford A. Meyer, Housheng Hansen He, Myles Brown, Jun S. Liu, Yang Xie, Xiaole Shirley Liu. High-dimensional genomic data integration and bias correction using MANCIE. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Chromatin and Epigenetics in Cancer; Sep 24-27, 2015; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(2 Suppl):Abstract nr B24.
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 | 0.009 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.005 |
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".