Adjusting for gene-specific covariates to improve RNA-seq analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY: This article suggests a novel positive false discovery rate (pFDR) controlling method for testing gene-specific hypotheses using a gene-specific covariate variable, such as gene length. We suppose the null probability depends on the covariate variable. In this context, we propose a rejection rule that accounts for heterogeneity among tests by using two distinct types of null probabilities. We establish a pFDR estimator for a given rejection rule by following Storey's q-value framework. A condition on a type 1 error posterior probability is provided that equivalently characterizes our rejection rule. We also present a suitable procedure for selecting a tuning parameter through cross-validation that maximizes the expected number of hypotheses declared significant. A simulation study demonstrates that our method is comparable to or better than existing methods across realistic scenarios. In data analysis, we find support for our method's premise that the null probability varies with a gene-specific covariate variable. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The source code repository is publicly available at https://github.com/hsjeon1217/conditional_method.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".