The scalable birth–death MCMC algorithm for mixed graphical model learning with application to genomic data integration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent advances in biological research have seen the emergence of high-throughput technologies with numerous applications that allow the study of biological mechanisms at an unprecedented depth and scale. A large amount of genomic data is now distributed through consortia like The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), where specific types of biological information on specific type of tissue or cell are available. In cancer research, the challenge is now to perform integrative analyses of high-dimensional multi-omic data with the goal to better understand genomic processes that correlate with cancer outcomes, e.g. elucidate gene networks that discriminate a specific cancer subgroups (cancer sub-typing) or discovering gene networks that overlap across different cancer types (pan-cancer studies). In this paper, we propose a novel mixed graphical model approach to analyze multi-omic data of different types (continuous, discrete and count) and perform model selection by extending the Birth-Death MCMC (BDMCMC) algorithm initially proposed by Stephens (2000) and later developed by Mohammadi and Wit (2015). We compare the performance of our method to the LASSO method and the standard BDMCMC method using simulations and find that our method is superior in terms of both computational efficiency and the accuracy of the model selection results. Finally, an application to the TCGA breast cancer data shows that integrating genomic information at different levels (mutation and expression data) leads to better subtyping of breast cancers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".