Discovering novel mutation signatures by latent Dirichlet allocation with variational Bayes inference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: A cancer genome includes many mutations derived from various mutagens and mutational processes, leading to specific mutation patterns. It is known that each mutational process leads to characteristic mutations, and when a mutational process has preferences for mutations, this situation is called a 'mutation signature.' Identification of mutation signatures is an important task for elucidation of carcinogenic mechanisms. In previous studies, analyses with statistical approaches (e.g. non-negative matrix factorization and latent Dirichlet allocation) revealed a number of mutation signatures. Nonetheless, strictly speaking, these existing approaches employ an ad hoc method or incorrect approximation to estimate the number of mutation signatures, and the whole picture of mutation signatures is unclear. RESULTS: In this study, we present a novel method for estimating the number of mutation signatures-latent Dirichlet allocation with variational Bayes inference (VB-LDA)-where variational lower bounds are utilized for finding a plausible number of mutation patterns. In addition, we performed cluster analyses for estimated mutation signatures to extract novel mutation signatures that appear in multiple primary lesions. In a simulation with artificial data, we confirmed that our method estimated the correct number of mutation signatures. Furthermore, applying our method in combination with clustering procedures for real mutation data revealed many interesting mutation signatures that have not been previously reported. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: All the predicted mutation signatures with clustering results are freely available at http://www.f.waseda.jp/mhamada/MS/index.html. All the C++ source code and python scripts utilized in this study can be downloaded on the Internet (https://github.com/qkirikigaku/MS_LDA). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".