A pattern-learning algorithm associates copy number variations with brain structure and behavioural variables in an adolescent population cohort
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our genetic makeup, together with environmental and social influences, shape our brain's development. Yet, the imaging-genetics field has struggled to integrate all these modalities to investigate the interplay between genetic blueprint, brain architecture, environment, human health and daily living skills. Here we interrogate the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) cohort to outline the effects of rare high-effect genetic variants on brain architecture and their corresponding implications on cognitive, behavioural, psychosocial and socioeconomic traits. We design a holistic pattern-learning framework that quantitatively dissects the impacts of copy number variations (CNVs) on brain structure and 938 behavioural variables spanning 20 categories in 7,338 adolescents. Our results reveal associations between genetic alterations, higher-order brain networks and specific parameters of the family wellbeing, including increased parental and child stress, anxiety and depression, or neighbourhood dynamics such as decreased safety. We thus find effects extending beyond the impairment of cognitive ability or language capacity which have been previously reported. Our investigation spotlights the interplay between genetic variation and subjective life quality in adolescents and their families.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it