MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952658960 · doi:10.1101/354811

Reproducible Data Analysis Pipelines for Precision Medicine

2018· preprint· en· W2952658960 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Bjørn Fjukstad, Vanessa Dumeaux, Michael Hallett, Lars Ailo Bongo

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Computing and Data Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Cancer Society Research Institute
KeywordsComputer sciencePipeline (software)Pipeline transportPrecision medicineData scienceData miningProcess (computing)SoftwareField (mathematics)EngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Precision medicine brings the promise of more precise diagnosis and individualized therapeutic strategies from analyzing a cancer’s genomic signature. Technologies such as high-throughput sequencing enable cheaper data collection at higher speed, but rely on modern data analysis platforms to extract knowledge from these high dimensional datasets. Since this is a rapidly advancing field, new diagnoses and therapies often require tailoring of the analysis. These pipelines are therefore developed iteratively, continuously modifying analysis parameters before arriving at the final results. To enable reproducible results it is important to record all these modifications and decisions made during the analysis process. We built a system, walrus , to support reproducible analyses for iteratively developed analysis pipelines. The approach is based on our experiences developing and using deep analysis pipelines to provide insights and recommendations for treatment in an actual breast cancer case. We designed walrus for the single servers or small compute clusters typically available for novel treatments in the clinical setting. walrus leverages software containers to provide reproducible execution environments, and integrates with modern version control systems to capture provenance of data and pipeline parameters. We have used walrus to analyze a patient’s primary tumor and adjacent normal tissue, including subsequent metastatic lesions. Although we have used walrus for specialized analyses of whole-exome sequencing datasets, it is a general data analysis tool that can be applied in a variety of scientific disciplines. We have open sourced walrus along with example data analysis pipelines at github.com/uit-bdps/walrus.

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)0.054
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.113
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reproducibility · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0540.113
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0060.010
Research integrity0.0020.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.010

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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.198 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainReproducibility
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicScientific Computing and Data ManagementFrench-language works237,207