Robust Somatic Copy Number Estimation using Coarse-to-fine Segmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Cancers routinely exhibit chromosomal instability that results in copy number variants (CNVs), namely changes in the abundance of genomic material. Unfortunately, the detection of these variants in cancer genomes is difficult. Methods: We present Ploidetect, a software package that effectively identifies CNVs within wholegenome sequenced tumors. Ploidetect utilizes a coarse-to-fine segmentation approach which yields highly contiguous segments while allowing for focal CNVs to be detected with high sensitivity. Results: We benchmark Ploidetect against popular CNV tools using synthetic data, cell line data, and real-world metastatic tumor data and demonstrate strong performance in all tests. We show that high quality CNVs from Ploidetect enable the identification of recurrent homozygous deletions and genes associated with chromosomal instability in a multi-cancer cohort of 687 patients. Using highly contiguous CNV calls afforded by Ploidetect, we also demonstrate the use of segment N50 as a novel metric for the measurement of chromosomal instability within tumor biopsies. Conclusion: We propose that the increasingly accurate determination of CNVs is critical for their productive study in cancer, and our work demonstrates advances made possible by progress in this regard.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".