A Novel Algorithm for Feature Selection Using Penalized Regression with Applications to Single-Cell RNA Sequencing Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the emergence of single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) technology, scientists are able to examine gene expression at single-cell resolution. Analysis of scRNA-seq data has its own challenges, which stem from its high dimensionality. The method of machine learning comes with the potential of gene (feature) selection from the high-dimensional scRNA-seq data. Even though there exist multiple machine learning methods that appear to be suitable for feature selection, such as penalized regression, there is no rigorous comparison of their performances across data sets, where each poses its own challenges. Therefore, in this paper, we analyzed and compared multiple penalized regression methods for scRNA-seq data. Given the scRNA-seq data sets we analyzed, the results show that sparse group lasso (SGL) outperforms the other six methods (ridge, lasso, elastic net, drop lasso, group lasso, and big lasso) using the metrics area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) and computation time. Building on these findings, we proposed a new algorithm for feature selection using penalized regression methods. The proposed algorithm works by selecting a small subset of genes and applying SGL to select the differentially expressed genes in scRNA-seq data. By using hierarchical clustering to group genes, the proposed method bypasses the need for domain-specific knowledge for gene grouping information. In addition, the proposed algorithm provided consistently better AUC for the data sets used.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".