Accounting for differences between Infinium MethylationEPIC v2 and v1 in DNA methylation–based tools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recently launched Illumina Infinium MethylationEPIC v2.0 (EPICv2), successor of MethylationEPIC v1.0 (EPICv1), retains most of the probes in EPICv1, while expanding coverage of regulatory elements. The concordance between the two EPIC versions in DNA methylation-based tools has not yet been investigated. To address this, DNA methylation was profiled on both versions using matched blood samples across four cohorts spanning early to late adulthood. High concordance between versions at the array level but variable agreement at the individual probe level was noted. A significant contribution of the EPIC version to DNA methylation variation was observed, though it was to a smaller extent compared with sample relatedness and cell-type composition. Modest but significant differences in DNA methylation-based estimates between versions were observed, irrespective of the data preprocessing method used. Adjustments for EPIC version or calculation of estimates separately for each version largely mitigated these version-specific discordances. This work emphasizes the importance of accounting for EPIC version differences in research scenarios, especially in meta-analyses and longitudinal studies that require data harmonization across versions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".