MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408209964 · doi:10.1186/s12859-025-06083-7

Cross-validation for training and testing co-occurrence network inference algorithms

2025· article· en· W4408209964 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Agyapong, Jeffrey Propster, Jane C. Marks, Toby Dylan Hocking

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Bioinformatics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInferenceComputer scienceMicrobiomeData miningMachine learningConsistency (knowledge bases)InterpretabilityArtificial intelligenceBioinformaticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Microorganisms are found in almost every environment, including soil, water, air and inside other organisms, such as animals and plants. While some microorganisms cause diseases, most of them help in biological processes such as decomposition, fermentation and nutrient cycling. Much research has been conducted on the study of microbial communities in various environments and how their interactions and relationships can provide insight into various diseases. Co-occurrence network inference algorithms help us understand the complex associations of micro-organisms, especially bacteria. Existing network inference algorithms employ techniques such as correlation, regularized linear regression, and conditional dependence, which have different hyper-parameters that determine the sparsity of the network. These complex microbial communities form intricate ecological networks that are fundamental to ecosystem functioning and host health. Understanding these networks is crucial for developing targeted interventions in both environmental and clinical settings. The emergence of high-throughput sequencing technologies has generated unprecedented amounts of microbiome data, necessitating robust computational methods for network inference and validation. RESULTS: Previous methods for evaluating the quality of the inferred network include using external data, and network consistency across sub-samples, both of which have several drawbacks that limit their applicability in real microbiome composition data sets. We propose a novel cross-validation method to evaluate co-occurrence network inference algorithms, and new methods for applying existing algorithms to predict on test data. Our method demonstrates superior performance in handling compositional data and addressing the challenges of high dimensionality and sparsity inherent in real microbiome datasets. The proposed framework also provides robust estimates of network stability. CONCLUSIONS: Our empirical study shows that the proposed cross-validation method is useful for hyper-parameter selection (training) and comparing the quality of inferred networks between different algorithms (testing). This advancement represents a significant step forward in microbiome network analysis, providing researchers with a reliable tool for understanding complex microbial interactions. The method's applicability extends beyond microbiome studies to other fields where network inference from high-dimensional compositional data is crucial, such as gene regulatory networks and ecological food webs. Our framework establishes a new standard for validation in network inference, potentially accelerating discoveries in microbial ecology and human health.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.604
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.305 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC BioinformaticsSame topicGut microbiota and healthFrench-language works237,207