MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159320036 · doi:10.1002/sim.9000

Score tests for scale effects, with application to genomic analysis

2021· article· en· W3159320036 on OpenAlexafffund
David Soave, Jerald F. Lawless, Philip Awadalla

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistics in Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity of WaterlooOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCovariateStatisticsMathematicsType I and type II errorsPermutation (music)Scale (ratio)GaussianApplied mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tests for variance or scale effects due to covariates are used in many areas and recently, in genomic and genetic association studies. We study score tests based on location-scale models with arbitrary error distributions that allow incorporation of additional adjustment covariates. Tests based on Gaussian and Laplacian double generalized linear models are examined in some detail. Numerical properties of the tests under Gaussian and other error distributions are examined. Our results show that the use of model-based asymptotic distributions with score tests for scale effects does not control type 1 error well in many settings of practical relevance. We consider simple statistics based on permutation distribution approximations, which correspond to well-known statistics derived by another approach. They are shown to give good type 1 error control under different error distributions and under covariate distribution imbalance. The methods are illustrated through a differential gene expression analysis involving breast cancer tumor samples.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.078
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.929

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.078
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.244
GPT teacher head0.552
Teacher spread0.308 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistics in MedicineSame topicStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsFrench-language works237,207