MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952071816 · doi:10.1101/002956

Functional normalization of 450k methylation array data improves replication in large cancer studies

2014· preprint· en· W2952071816 on OpenAlexafffund
Jean‐Philippe Fortin, Aurélie Labbe, Mathieu Lemire, Brent W. Zanke, Thomas J. Hudson, Elana J. Fertig, Celia M.T. Greenwood, Kasper D. Hansen

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2014
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEpigenetics and DNA Methylation
Canadian institutionsJewish General HospitalUniversity of TorontoOttawa HospitalMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesJohns Hopkins UniversityOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthOntario Institute for Cancer Research
KeywordsNormalization (sociology)Computer scienceComputational biologyMethylationEpigeneticsBiologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We propose an extension to quantile normalization which removes unwanted technical variation using control probes. We adapt our algorithm, functional normalization, to the Illumina 450k methylation array and address the open problem of normalizing methylation data with global epigenetic changes, such as human cancers. Using datasets from The Cancer Genome Atlas and a large case-control study, we show that our algorithm outperforms all existing normalization methods with respect to replication of results between experiments, and yields robust results even in the presence of batch effects. Functional normalization can be applied to any microarray platform, provided suitable control probes are available.

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)0.037
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.085
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.198

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0370.085
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations32
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicEpigenetics and DNA MethylationFrench-language works237,207