An expression-directed linear mixed model discovering low-effect genetic variants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Detecting genetic variants with low-effect sizes using a moderate sample size is difficult, hindering downstream efforts to learn pathology and estimating heritability. In this work, by utilizing informative weights learned from training genetically predicted gene expression models, we formed an alternative approach to estimate the polygenic term in a linear mixed model. Our linear mixed model estimates the genetic background by incorporating their relevance to gene expression. Our protocol, expression-directed linear mixed model, enables the discovery of subtle signals of low-effect variants using moderate sample size. By applying expression-directed linear mixed model to cohorts of around 5,000 individuals with either binary (WTCCC) or quantitative (NFBC1966) traits, we demonstrated its power gain at the low-effect end of the genetic etiology spectrum. In aggregate, the additional low-effect variants detected by expression-directed linear mixed model substantially improved estimation of missing heritability. Expression-directed linear mixed model moves precision medicine forward by accurately detecting the contribution of low-effect genetic variants to human diseases.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".