A robust method to estimate regional polygenic correlation under misspecified linkage disequilibrium structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Complex traits can share a substantial proportion of their polygenic heritability. However, genome-wide polygenic correlations between pairs of traits can mask heterogeneity in their shared polygenic effects across loci. We propose a novel method (weighted maximum likelihood-regional polygenic correlation [RPC]) to evaluate polygenic correlation between two complex traits in small genomic regions using summary association statistics. Our method tests for evidence that the polygenic effect at a given region affects two traits concurrently. We show through simulations that our method is well calibrated, powerful, and more robust to misspecification of linkage disequilibrium than other methods under a polygenic model. As small genomic regions are more likely to harbor specific genetic effects, our method is ideal to identify heterogeneity in shared polygenic correlation across regions. We illustrate the usefulness of our method by addressing two questions related to cardiometabolic traits. First, we explored how RPC can inform on the strong epidemiological association between high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and coronary artery disease (CAD), suggesting a key role for triglycerides metabolism. Second, we investigated the potential role of PPARγ activators in the prevention of CAD. Our results provide a compelling argument that shared heritability between complex traits is highly heterogeneous across loci.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".