Metric learning for comparing genomic data with triplet network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many biological applications are essentially pairwise comparison problems, such as evolutionary relationships on genomic sequences, contigs binning on metagenomic data, cell type identification on gene expression profiles of single-cells, etc. To make pair-wise comparison, it is necessary to adopt suitable dissimilarity metric. However, not all the metrics can be fully adapted to all possible biological applications. It is necessary to employ metric learning based on data adaptive to the application of interest. Therefore, in this study, we proposed MEtric Learning with Triplet network (MELT), which learns a nonlinear mapping from original space to the embedding space in order to keep similar data closer and dissimilar data far apart. MELT is a weakly supervised and data-driven comparison framework that offers more adaptive and accurate dissimilarity learned in the absence of the label information when the supervised methods are not applicable. We applied MELT in three typical applications of genomic data comparison, including hierarchical genomic sequences, longitudinal microbiome samples and longitudinal single-cell gene expression profiles, which have no distinctive grouping information. In the experiments, MELT demonstrated its empirical utility in comparison to many widely used dissimilarity metrics. And MELT is expected to accommodate a more extensive set of applications in large-scale genomic comparisons. MELT is available at https://github.com/Ying-Lab/MELT.
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 | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".