MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6888466618 · doi:10.20381/ruor-4387

Annotation Concept Synthesis and Enrichment Analysis: a Logic-Based Approach to the Interpretation of High-Throughput Biological Experiments

2011· article· en· W6888466618 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnnotationSet (abstract data type)Gene AnnotationInterpretation (philosophy)Object (grammar)Process (computing)Temporal annotationExpression (computer science)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Annotation Enrichment Analysis is a widely used analytical methodology to process data generated by high-throughput genomic and proteomic experiments such as gene expression microarrays. The analysis uncovers and summarizes discriminating background information for sets of genes identified by the previous processing stages (e.g., a set of differentially expressed genes, a cluster). Enrichment analysis algorithms attach annotations to the genes and then discover statistical fluctuations of individual annotation terms in a given gene subset. The annotation terms represent different aspects of biological knowledge and come from databases such as GO, BIND, KEGG. Typical statistical models used to detect enrichments or depletions of annotation terms are hypergeometric, binomial and X2. At the end, the discovered information is utilized by human experts to find biological interpretations of the experiments. The main drawback of AEA is that it isolates and tests for overrepresentation of isolated individual annotation terms or groups of similar terms. As a result, AEA is limited in its ability to uncover complex phenomena involving relationships between multiple annotation terms from various knowledge bases. Also, AEA assumes that annotations describe the whole object of interest, which makes it difficult to apply it to sets of compound objects (e.g., sets of protein-protein interactions) and to sets of objects having an internal structure (e.g., protein complexes). To overcome this shortcoming, we propose a novel logic-based Annotation Concept Synthesis and Enrichment Analysis (ACSEA) approach. In this approach, the source annotation information, experimental data and uncovered enriched annotations are represented as First-Order Logic (FOL) statements. ACSEA uses the fusion of inductive logic reasoning with statistical inference to uncover more complex phenomena captured by the experiments. The proposed paradigm allows a synthesis of enriched annotation concepts that better describe the observed biological processes. The methodological advantage of Annotation Concept Synthesis and Enrichment Analysis is six-fold. Firstly, it is easier to represent complex, structural annotation information. Information already captured and formalized in OWL and RDF knowledge bases can be directly utilized. Secondly, it is possible to synthesize and analyze complex annotation concepts. Thirdly, it is possible to perform the enrichment analysis for sets of aggregate objects (such as sets of genetic interactions, physical protein-protein interactions or sets of protein complexes). Fourthly, annotation concepts are straightforward to interpret by a human expert. Fifthly, the logic data model and logic induction are a common platform that can integrate specialized analytical tools (e.g. tools for numerical, structural and sequential analysis). Sixthly, used statistical inference methods are robust on noisy and incomplete data, scalable and trusted by human experts in the field. In this thesis we developed and implemented the ACSEA approach. We evaluate it on large-scale datasets from several microarray experiments and on a clustered genome-wide genetic interaction network using different biological knowledge bases. Also, we define a statistical model of experimental and annotation data and evaluate ACSEA on synthetic datasets. The discovered interpretations are more enriched in terms of P- and Q-values than the interpretations found by AEA, are highly integrative in nature, and include analysis of quantitative and structured information present in the knowledge bases. The results suggest that ACSEA can significantly boost the effectiveness of the processing of high-throughput experiment data.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.357
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207