MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2592257068 · doi:10.1186/s13059-017-1169-3

ddClone: joint statistical inference of clonal populations from single cell and bulk tumour sequencing data

2017· article· en· W2592257068 on OpenAlexafffund
Adi Steif, Andrew Roth, Samuel Aparício, Alexandre Bouchard‐Côté, Sohrab P. Shah

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome biology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsGenome British ColumbiaMichael Smith Health Research BCBC Cancer FoundationCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGenome Canada
KeywordsBiologyInferenceComputational biologyStatistical inferenceDNA sequencingDeconvolutionPopulationHuman geneticsSampling (signal processing)GeneticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeneAlgorithmStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) of bulk tumour tissue can identify constituent cell populations in cancers and measure their abundance. This requires computational deconvolution of allelic counts from somatic mutations, which may be incapable of fully resolving the underlying population structure. Single cell sequencing (SCS) is a more direct method, although its replacement of NGS is impeded by technical noise and sampling limitations. We propose ddClone, which analytically integrates NGS and SCS data, leveraging their complementary attributes through joint statistical inference. We show on real and simulated datasets that ddClone produces more accurate results than can be achieved by either method alone.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.090
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations65
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenome biologySame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207