MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2567286744 · doi:10.1002/bimj.201500254

Multiple confidence intervals for selected parameters adjusted for the false coverage rate in monotone dose–response microarray experiments

2016· article· en· W2567286744 on OpenAlex
Jianan Peng, Wei Liu, Frank Bretz, Ziv Shkedy

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrical Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMonotone polygonConfidence intervalFalse discovery rateMathematicsMicroarrayStatisticsSelection (genetic algorithm)Multiple comparisons problemMicroarray analysis techniquesGeneBiologyComputer scienceGene expressionGeneticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Benjamini and Yekutieli () introduced the concept of the false coverage-statement rate (FCR) to account for selection when the confidence intervals (CIs) are constructed only for the selected parameters. Dose-response analysis in dose-response microarray experiments is conducted only for genes having monotone dose-response relationship, which is a selection problem. In this paper, we consider multiple CIs for the mean gene expression difference between the highest dose and control in monotone dose-response microarray experiments for selected parameters adjusted for the FCR. A simulation study is conducted to study the performance of the method proposed. The method is applied to a real dose-response microarray experiment with 16, 998 genes for illustration.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.269
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it