MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945564624 · doi:10.1142/s0219720019500173

DSRIG: Incorporating graphical structure in the regularized modeling of SNP data

2019· article· en· W2945564624 on OpenAlexafffund
Matthew Stephenson, Gerarda Darlington, Flávio S. Schenkel, E. James Squires, R. Ayesha Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersAgricultural Adaptation CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsSingle-nucleotide polymorphismBoar taintSelection (genetic algorithm)Lasso (programming language)Candidate geneAndrostenoneSNPTraitRegressionComputer scienceBiologyStatisticsMathematicsComputational biologyGeneticsArtificial intelligenceGeneGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genetic selection of farm animals plays an important role in genetic improvement programs. Regularized regression methods on single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) data from a set of candidate genes can help to identify genes that are associated with the trait of interest. This complex task must also consider the relative effect sizes on the desired trait and account for the relationships among the candidate SNPs so that selection of a SNP does not promote other undesirable traits through breeding. We present the Doubly Sparse Regression Incorporating Graphical structure (DSRIG), a novel regularized method for genetic selection that exploits the relationships among candidate SNPs to improve prediction. DSRIG was applied in the prediction of skatole and androstenone levels, two compounds known to be associated with boar taint. DSRIG was shown to provide a predictive benefit when compared to ordinary least squares (OLS) and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) in a cross-validation procedure. The relative sizes of the coefficient estimates over the cross-validation procedure were compared to determine which SNPs may have the greatest impact on expression of the boar taint compounds and a consensus graph was used to infer the relationships among SNPs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bioinformatics and Computational BiologySame topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockFrench-language works237,207