A novel statistical method for modeling covariate effects in bisulfite sequencing derived measures of DNA methylation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Identifying disease-associated changes in DNA methylation can help us gain a better understanding of disease etiology. Bisulfite sequencing allows the generation of high-throughput methylation profiles at single-base resolution of DNA. However, optimally modeling and analyzing these sparse and discrete sequencing data is still very challenging due to variable read depth, missing data patterns, long-range correlations, data errors, and confounding from cell type mixtures. We propose a regression-based hierarchical model that allows covariate effects to vary smoothly along genomic positions and we have built a specialized EM algorithm, which explicitly allows for experimental errors and cell type mixtures, to make inference about smooth covariate effects in the model. Simulations show that the proposed method provides accurate estimates of covariate effects and captures the major underlying methylation patterns with excellent power. We also apply our method to analyze data from rheumatoid arthritis patients and controls. The method has been implemented in R package SOMNiBUS.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".