Error modelled gene expression analysis (EMOGEA) provides a superior overview of time course RNA-seq measurements and low count gene expression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Temporal RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq) studies of bulk samples provide an opportunity for improved understanding of gene regulation during dynamic phenomena such as development, tumor progression or response to an incremental dose of a pharmacotherapeutic. Moreover, single-cell RNA-seq (scRNA-seq) data implicitly exhibit temporal characteristics because gene expression values recapitulate dynamic processes such as cellular transitions. Unfortunately, temporal RNA-seq data continue to be analyzed by methods that ignore this ordinal structure and yield results that are often difficult to interpret. Here, we present Error Modelled Gene Expression Analysis (EMOGEA), a framework for analyzing RNA-seq data that incorporates measurement uncertainty, while introducing a special formulation for those acquired to monitor dynamic phenomena. This method is specifically suited for RNA-seq studies in which low-count transcripts with small-fold changes lead to significant biological effects. Such transcripts include genes involved in signaling and non-coding RNAs that inherently exhibit low levels of expression. Using simulation studies, we show that this framework down-weights samples that exhibit extreme responses such as batch effects allowing them to be modeled with the rest of the samples and maintain the degrees of freedom originally envisioned for a study. Using temporal experimental data, we demonstrate the framework by extracting a cascade of gene expression waves from a well-designed RNA-seq study of zebrafish embryogenesis and an scRNA-seq study of mouse pre-implantation and provide unique biological insights into the regulation of genes in each wave. For non-ordinal measurements, we show that EMOGEA has a much higher rate of true positive calls and a vanishingly small rate of false negative discoveries compared to common approaches. Finally, we provide two packages in Python and R that are self-contained and easy to use, including test data.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".