MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402373740 · doi:10.1136/jnnp-2024-ehdn.4

A004 A markov chain-based bayesian population model for somatic instability in human white blood cells

2024· article· en· W4402373740 on OpenAlexaff
John Harley Warner, Douglas R. Langbehn, Stanley E. Lazic, Gabriel Phelan, Marc Ciosi, Darren G. Monckton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBody Composition Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsPrioris.ai (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarkov chainBayesian probabilityPopulationInstabilityComputer scienceSomatic cellArtificial intelligencePhysicsBiologyMachine learningGeneticsDemographyMechanicsSociologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3></h3> Using a database of HTT CAG-length distributions determined by amplicon sequencing in White Blood Cells (WBCs) collected from 1447 participant-visits from the Registry and Enroll-HD Studies, we build a Bayesian population model based on the assumption that CAG length distributions evolve over time according to a continuous time Markov chain in which changes in CAG length occur in single CAG length jumps. These Markov chains have jump rates that increase with CAG length, resulting in both expansions and contractions with a bias toward expansion. The effects of PCR-induced slippage were corrected using single molecule data, a novel multinomial logit model and a novel algorithm based on convex programming. Models were fit to the PCR slippage-corrected data using a fast BFGS algorithm in R. This algorithm minimizes both least squares and Kullback-Liebler loss functions and uses analytic gradients of the matrix exponential function. Participant-level models are shown to fit very well and predict CAG length distributions at the second visit 2 from distributions at visit 1. Model parameters for jump rate and expansion bias are correlated with inherited CAG length, CAP score, age-at-baseline, and time- between-visits. Finally, a Bayesian population-based model (implemented in the Stan Statistical Software Package) was used to model the precision of the participant-level model fits using a novel application of the Dirichlet distribution. Implications for studies of somatic instability in other cell types are discussed as are the uses of the statistical methodology described here in biomarker development.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.568

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBody Composition Measurement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207