An evolutionary learning and network approach to identifying key metabolites for osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metabolomics studies use quantitative analyses of metabolites from body fluids or tissues in order to investigate a sequence of cellular processes and biological systems in response to genetic and environmental influences. This promises an immense potential for a better understanding of the pathogenesis of complex diseases. Most conventional metabolomics analysis methods exam one metabolite at a time and may overlook the synergistic effect of combining multiple metabolites. In this article, we proposed a new bioinformatics framework that infers the non-linear synergy among multiple metabolites using a symbolic model and subsequently, identify key metabolites using network analysis. Such a symbolic model is able to represent a complex non-linear relationship among a set of metabolites associated with osteoarthritis (OA) and is automatically learned using an evolutionary algorithm. Applied to the Newfoundland Osteoarthritis Study (NFOAS) dataset, our methodology was able to identify nine key metabolites including some known osteoarthritis-associated metabolites and some novel metabolic markers that have never been reported before. The results demonstrate the effectiveness of our methodology and more importantly, with further investigations, propose new hypotheses that can help better understand the OA disease.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".