PhyloMix: Enhancing microbiome-trait association prediction through phylogeny-mixing augmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Motivation Understanding the associations between traits and microbial composition is a fundamental objective in microbiome research. Recently, researchers have turned to machine learning (ML) models to achieve this goal with promising results. However, the effectiveness of advanced ML models is often limited by the unique characteristics of microbiome data, which are typically high-dimensional, compositional, and imbalanced. These characteristics can hinder the models’ ability to fully explore the relationships among taxa in predictive analyses. To address this challenge, data augmentation has become crucial. It involves generating synthetic samples with artificial labels based on existing data and incorporating these samples into the training set to improve ML model performance. Results Here we propose PhyloMix, a novel data augmentation method specifically designed for microbiome data to enhance predictive analyses. PhyloMix leverages the phylogenetic relationships among microbiome taxa as an informative prior to guide the generation of synthetic microbial samples. Leveraging phylogeny, PhyloMix creates new samples by removing a subtree from one sample and combining it with the corresponding subtree from another sample. Notably, PhyloMix is designed to address the compositional nature of microbiome data, effectively handling both raw counts and relative abundances. This approach introduces sufficient diversity into the augmented samples, leading to improved predictive performance. We empirically evaluated PhyloMix on six real microbiome datasets across five commonly used ML models. PhyloMix significantly outperforms distinct baseline methods including sample-mixing-based data augmentation techniques like vanilla mixup and compositional cutmix, as well as the phylogeny-based method TADA. We also demonstrated the wide applicability of PhyloMix in both supervised learning and contrastive representation learning. Availability The Apache licensed source code is available at ( https://github.com/batmen-lab/phylomix ).
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".