Machine Learning Assisted Discovery of Interactions between Pesticides, Phthalates, Phenols, and Trace Elements in Child Neurodevelopment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A growing body of literature suggests that developmental exposure to individual or mixtures of environmental chemicals (ECs) is associated with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). However, investigating the effect of interactions among these ECs can be challenging. We introduced a combination of the classical exposure-mixture Weighted Quantile Sum (WQS) regression and a machine-learning method termed Signed iterative Random Forest (SiRF) to discover synergistic interactions between ECs that are (1) associated with higher odds of ASD diagnosis, (2) mimic toxicological interactions, and (3) are present only in a subset of the sample whose chemical concentrations are higher than certain thresholds. In a case-control Childhood Autism Risks from Genetics and Environment (CHARGE) study, we evaluated multiordered synergistic interactions among 62 ECs measured in the urine samples of 479 children in association with increased odds for ASD diagnosis (yes vs no). WQS-SiRF identified two synergistic two-ordered interactions between (1) trace-element cadmium (Cd) and the organophosphate pesticide metabolite diethyl-phosphate (DEP); and (2) 2,4,6-trichlorophenol (TCP-246) and DEP. Both interactions were suggestively associated with increased odds of ASD diagnosis in the subset of children with urinary concentrations of Cd, DEP, and TCP-246 above the 75th percentile. This study demonstrates a novel method that combines the inferential power of WQS and the predictive accuracy of machine-learning algorithms to discover potentially biologically relevant chemical-chemical interactions associated with ASD.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".