Functional Neural Networks for High-Dimensional Genetic Data Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is a thriving research field with many successful applications in areas such as computer vision and speech recognition. Machine learning methods, such as artificial neural networks (ANN), play a central role in modern AI technology. While ANN also holds great promise for human genetic research, the high-dimensional genetic data and complex genetic structure bring tremendous challenges. The vast majority of genetic variants on the genome have small or no effects on diseases, and fitting ANN on a large number of variants without considering the underlying genetic structure (e.g., linkage disequilibrium) could bring a serious overfitting issue. Furthermore, while a single disease phenotype is often studied in a classic genetic study, in emerging research fields (e.g., imaging genetics), researchers need to deal with different types of disease phenotypes. To address these challenges, we propose a functional neural networks (FNN) method. FNN uses a series of basis functions to model high-dimensional genetic data and a variety of phenotype data and further builds a multi-layer functional neural network to capture the complex relationships between genetic variants and disease phenotypes. Through simulations, we demonstrate the advantages of FNN for high-dimensional genetic data analysis in terms of robustness and accuracy. The real data applications also showed that FNN attained higher accuracy than the existing methods.
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".