MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3169835580 · doi:10.1002/sam.11530

Penalized composite likelihood for colored graphical Gaussian models

2021· article· en· W3169835580 on OpenAlexafffund
Qiong Li, Xiaoying Sun, Nanwei Wang, Xin Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistical Analysis and Data Mining The ASA Data Science Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai HospitalYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGraphical modelComputer scienceGaussianAlgorithmMatrix (chemical analysis)EstimatorSelection (genetic algorithm)Model selectionColoredPattern recognition (psychology)Data miningMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article proposes a penalized composite likelihood method for model selection in colored graphical Gaussian models. The method provides a sparse and symmetry‐constrained estimator of the precision matrix and thus conducts model selection and precision matrix estimation simultaneously. In particular, the method uses penalty terms to constrain the elements of the precision matrix, which enables us to transform the model selection problem into a constrained optimization problem. Further, computer experiments are conducted to illustrate the performance of the proposed new methodology. It is shown that the proposed method performs well in both the selection of nonzero elements in the precision matrix and the identification of symmetry structures in graphical models. The feasibility and potential clinical application of the proposed method are demonstrated on a microarray gene expression dataset.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.301 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistical Analysis and Data Mining The ASA Data Science JournalSame topicGene expression and cancer classificationFrench-language works237,207