MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Supervised learning on phylogenetically distributed data

2020· article· en· W3115522577 on OpenAlexafffund
Elliot Layne, Erika Dort, Richard C. Hamelin, Yue Li, Mathieu Blanchette

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill University
FundersGenome Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceGeneralizationPhylogenetic treeContext (archaeology)Machine learningArtificial intelligenceIndependent and identically distributed random variablesFlexibility (engineering)Artificial neural networkTree (set theory)Data miningBiologyMathematicsStatisticsGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: The ability to develop robust machine-learning (ML) models is considered imperative to the adoption of ML techniques in biology and medicine fields. This challenge is particularly acute when data available for training is not independent and identically distributed (iid), in which case trained models are vulnerable to out-of-distribution generalization problems. Of particular interest are problems where data correspond to observations made on phylogenetically related samples (e.g. antibiotic resistance data). RESULTS: We introduce DendroNet, a new approach to train neural networks in the context of evolutionary data. DendroNet explicitly accounts for the relatedness of the training/testing data, while allowing the model to evolve along the branches of the phylogenetic tree, hence accommodating potential changes in the rules that relate genotypes to phenotypes. Using simulated data, we demonstrate that DendroNet produces models that can be significantly better than non-phylogenetically aware approaches. DendroNet also outperforms other approaches at two biological tasks of significant practical importance: antiobiotic resistance prediction in bacteria and trophic level prediction in fungi. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: https://github.com/BlanchetteLab/DendroNet.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207