CopyMix: Mixture model based single-cell clustering and copy number profiling using variational inference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Investigating tumor heterogeneity using single-cell sequencing technologies is imperative to understand how tumors evolve since each cell subpopulation harbors a unique set of genomic features that yields a unique phenotype, which is bound to have clinical relevance. Clustering of cells based on copy number data obtained from single-cell DNA sequencing provides an opportunity to identify different tumor cell subpopulations. Accordingly, computational methods have emerged for single-cell copy number profiling and clustering; however, these two tasks have been handled sequentially by applying various ad-hoc pre- and post-processing steps; hence, a procedure vulnerable to introducing clustering artifacts. We avoid the clustering artifact issues in our method, CopyMix, a Variational Inference for a novel mixture model, by jointly inferring cell clusters and their underlying copy number profile. Our probabilistic graphical model is an improved version of the mixture of hidden Markov models, which is designed uniquely to infer single-cell copy number profiling and clustering. For the evaluation, we used likelihood-ratio test, CH index, Silhouette, V-measure, total variation scores. CopyMix performs well on both biological and simulated data. Our favorable results indicate a considerable potential to obtain clinical impact by using CopyMix in studies of cancer tumor heterogeneity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".