Disentangling genetic feature selection and aggregation in transcriptome-wide association studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The success of transcriptome-wide association studies (TWAS) has led to substantial research toward improving the predictive accuracy of its core component of genetically regulated expression (GReX). GReX links expression information with genotype and phenotype by playing two roles simultaneously: it acts as both the outcome of the genotype-based predictive models (for predicting expressions) and the linear combination of genotypes (as the predicted expressions) for association tests. From the perspective of machine learning (considering SNPs as features), these are actually two separable steps-feature selection and feature aggregation-which can be independently conducted. In this study, we show that the single approach of GReX limits the adaptability of TWAS methodology and practice. By conducting simulations and real data analysis, we demonstrate that disentangled protocols adapting straightforward approaches for feature selection (e.g., simple marker test) and aggregation (e.g., kernel machines) outperform the standard TWAS protocols that rely on GReX. Our development provides more powerful novel tools for conducting TWAS. More importantly, our characterization of the exact nature of TWAS suggests that, instead of questionably binding two distinct steps into the same statistical form (GReX), methodological research focusing on optimal combinations of feature selection and aggregation approaches will bring higher power to TWAS protocols.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".