Statistical modeling on human microbiome sequencing data
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research studies have shown that human microbiome is associated with many diseases through the linkage between bacterial taxa and environmental and genetic factors. Typical human microbiome sequencing data that obtained by next generation sequencing technologies of the 16S rRNA gene are high dimensional and sparse because most taxa are not shared among the samples. As a result, the data is often over-dispersed and with excess zeros. These features rise statistical challenges for compositional data analysis. We review the recent statistical methodology development for this setting. In particular, we summarize some current popular parametric probability models including the cases when repeated measurements of the microbiome are applicable. Multivariate analyses methods that are based on distance measurement for testing differences between microbes community are introduced. Statistical models which are developed to assess the association between genetic variants on X-chromosome and microbial components are highlighted. We discuss some applications on analysis of the association of host genome, microbial compositions and human diseases. Despite sophisticated approaches to statistical analysis of taxa count data, we suggest some future research directions on how to classify and predict clinical outcomes with microbial compositions.
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it