A Novel Approach to Single Cell RNA-Sequence Analysis Facilitates In Silico Gene Reporting of Human Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Retinal Cell Types
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cell type-specific investigations commonly use gene reporters or single-cell analytical techniques. However, reporter line development is arduous and generally limited to a single gene of interest, while single-cell RNA (scRNA)-sequencing (seq) frequently yields equivocal results that preclude definitive cell identification. To examine gene expression profiles of multiple retinal cell types derived from human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs), we performed scRNA-seq on optic vesicle (OV)-like structures cultured under cGMP-compatible conditions. However, efforts to apply traditional scRNA-seq analytical methods based on unbiased algorithms were unrevealing. Therefore, we developed a simple, versatile, and universally applicable approach that generates gene expression data akin to those obtained from reporter lines. This method ranks single cells by expression level of a bait gene and searches the transcriptome for genes whose cell-to-cell rank order expression most closely matches that of the bait. Moreover, multiple bait genes can be combined to refine datasets. Using this approach, we provide further evidence for the authenticity of hPSC-derived retinal cell types. Stem Cells 2018;36:313-324.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".