Statistical Learning of Large-Scale Genetic Data: How to Run a Genome-Wide Association Study of Gene-Expression Data Using the 1000 Genomes Project Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Teaching statistics through engaging applications to contemporary large-scale datasets is essential to attracting students to the field. To this end, we developed a hands-on, week-long workshop for senior high-school or junior undergraduate students, without prior knowledge in statistical genetics but with some basic knowledge in data science, to conduct their own genome-wide association study (GWAS). The GWAS was performed for open source gene expression data, using publicly available human genetics data. Assisted by a detailed instruction manual, students were able to obtain $$\sim$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mo>∼</mml:mo> </mml:math> 1.4 million p-values from a real scientific study, within several days. This early motivation kept students engaged in learning the theories that support their results, including regression, data visualization, results interpretation, and large-scale multiple hypothesis testing. To further their learning motivation by emphasizing the personal connection to this type of data analysis, students were encouraged to make short presentations about how GWAS has provided insights into the genetic basis of diseases that are present in their friends or families. The appended open source, step-by-step instruction manual includes descriptions of the datasets used, the software needed, and results from the workshop. Additionally, scripts used in the workshop are archived on Github and Zenodo to further enhance reproducible research and training.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".