MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282563525 · doi:10.1101/2022.06.08.495370

Multi-objective Bayesian Optimization with Heuristic Objectives for Biomedical and Molecular Data Analysis Workflows

2022· preprint· en· W4282563525 on OpenAlexafffund
Alina Selega, Kieran R. Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchVector InstituteLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaVector Institute
KeywordsComputer scienceBayesian optimizationWorkflowMulti-objective optimizationHeuristicSet (abstract data type)Bayesian probabilityData miningGaussian processA priori and a posterioriMachine learningProcess (computing)Mathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceGaussianMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many practical applications require optimization of multiple, computationally expensive, and possibly competing objectives that are well-suited for multi-objective Bayesian optimization (MOBO) procedures. However, for many types of biomedical data, measures of data analysis workflow success are often heuristic and therefore it is not known a priori which objectives are useful. Thus, MOBO methods that return the full Pareto front may be suboptimal in these cases. Here we propose a novel MOBO method that adaptively updates the scalarization function using properties of the posterior of a multi-output Gaussian process surrogate function. This approach selects useful objectives based on a flexible set of desirable criteria, allowing the functional form of each objective to guide optimization. We demonstrate the qualitative behaviour of our method on toy data and perform proof-of-concept analyses of single-cell RNA sequencing and highly multiplexed imaging datasets.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.708
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomicsFrench-language works237,207