ICN: a normalization method for gene expression data considering the over-expression of informative genes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The global increase of gene expression has been frequently established in cancer microarray studies. However, many genes may not deliver informative signals for a given experiment, due to insufficient expression or even non-expression, despite the DNA microarrays massively measuring genes in parallel. Hence the informative gene set, rather than the whole genome, should be more reasonable to represent the genome expression level. We observed that the trend of over-expression for informative genes is more obvious in human cancers, which is to some extent masked using the whole genome without any filtering. Accordingly we proposed a novel normalization method, Informative CrossNorm (ICN), which performs the cross normalization (CrossNorm) on the expression matrix merely containing the informative genes. ICN outperforms other methods with a consistently high precision, F-score, and Matthews correlation coefficient as well as an acceptable recall based on three available spiked-in datasets with ground truth. In addition, nine potential therapeutic target genes for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) were identified using ICN integrated with a protein-protein interaction network, which biologically demonstrates that ICN shows superior performance. Consequently, it is expected that ICN could be applied routinely in cancer microarray studies.
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 | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".