Partial least squares correspondence analysis: A framework to simultaneously analyze behavioral and genetic data.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For nearly a century, detecting the genetic contributions to cognitive and behavioral phenomena has been a core interest for psychological research. Recently, this interest has been reinvigorated by the availability of genotyping technologies (e.g., microarrays) that provide new genetic data, such as single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). These SNPs-which represent pairs of nucleotide letters (e.g., AA, AG, or GG) found at specific positions on human chromosomes-are best considered as categorical variables, but this coding scheme can make difficult the multivariate analysis of their relationships with behavioral measurements, because most multivariate techniques developed for the analysis between sets of variables are designed for quantitative variables. To palliate this problem, we present a generalization of partial least squares-a technique used to extract the information common to 2 different data tables measured on the same observations-called partial least squares correspondence analysis-that is specifically tailored for the analysis of categorical and mixed ("heterogeneous") data types. Here, we formally define and illustrate-in a tutorial format-how partial least squares correspondence analysis extends to various types of data and design problems that are particularly relevant for psychological research that include genetic data. We illustrate partial least squares correspondence analysis with genetic, behavioral, and neuroimaging data from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. R code is available on the Comprehensive R Archive Network and via the authors' websites. (PsycINFO Database Record
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 | 0.023 | 0.053 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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".