An analytic approach for interpretable predictive models in high dimensional data, in the presence of interactions with exposures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Predicting a phenotype and understanding which variables improve that prediction are two very challenging and overlapping problems in analysis of high-dimensional data such as those arising from genomic and brain imaging studies. It is often believed that the number of truly important predictors is small relative to the total number of variables, making computational approaches to variable selection and dimension reduction extremely important. To reduce dimensionality, commonly-used two-step methods first cluster the data in some way, and build models using cluster summaries to predict the phenotype. It is known that important exposure variables can alter correlation patterns between clusters of high-dimensional variables, i.e., alter network properties of the variables. However, it is not well understood whether such altered clustering is informative in prediction. Here, assuming there is a binary exposure with such network-altering effects, we explore whether use of exposure-dependent clustering relationships in dimension reduction can improve predictive modelling in a two-step framework. Hence, we propose a modelling framework called ECLUST to test this hypothesis, and evaluate its performance through extensive simulations. With ECLUST, we found improved prediction and variable selection performance compared to methods that do not consider the environment in the clustering step, or to methods that use the original data as features. We further illustrate this modelling framework through the analysis of three data sets from very different fields, each with high dimensional data, a binary exposure, and a phenotype of interest. Our method is available in the eclust CRAN package.
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 | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".