MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2795807893 · doi:10.1101/296947

Detecting Differential Variable microRNAs via Model-Based Clustering

2018· preprint· en· W2795807893 on OpenAlexafffund
Xuan Li, Yuejiao Fu, Xiaogang Wang, Dawn L. DeMeo, Kelan G. Tantisira, Scott T. Weiss, Weiliang Qiu

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicroRNA in disease regulation
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsCluster analysismicroRNADNA methylationComputational biologyEpigeneticsBiologyCovarianceGeneticsComputer scienceMathematicsStatisticsArtificial intelligenceGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Identifying genomic probes (e.g., DNA methylation marks) is becoming a new approach to detect novel genomic risk factors for complex human diseases. The F test is the standard equal-variance test in Statistics. For high-throughput genomic data, the probe-wise F test has been successfully used to detect biologically relevant DNA methylation marks that have different variances between two groups of subjects (e.g., cases vs. controls). In addition to DNA methylation, microRNA is another mechanism of epigenetics. However, to the best of our knowledge, no studies have identified differentially variable (DV) microRNAs. In this article, we proposed a novel model-based clustering to improve the power of the probe-wise F test to detect DV microRNAs. We imposed special structures on covariance matrices for each cluster of microRNAs based on the prior information about the relationship between variance in cases and variance in controls and about the independence among cases and controls. To the best of our knowledge, the proposed method is the first clustering algorithm that aims to detect DV genomic probes. Simulation studies showed that the proposed method outperformed the probe-wise F test and had certain robustness to the violation of the normality assumption. Based on two real datasets about human hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), we identified 7 DV-only microRNAs (hsa-miR-1826, hsa-miR-191, hsa-miR-194-star, hsa-miR-222, hsa-miR-502-3p, hsa-miR-93, and hsa-miR-99b) using the proposed method, one (hsa-miR-1826) of which has not yet been reported to relate to HCC in the literature.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.205 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicMicroRNA in disease regulation→French-language works237,207→