Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38011281›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2023

On convolutional neural networks for selection inference: Revealing the effect of preprocessing on model learning and the capacity to discover novel patterns.

Ryan M Cecil, Lauren A Sugden

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The persistence and loss of hard selective sweeps amid admixture in ancient Eurasians.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Digital Image Processing to Detect Adaptive Evolution.Molecular biology and evolution · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ryan M CecilDepartment of Mathematics and Computer Science, Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America.ORCID 0009-0007-8039-1046
Lauren A SugdenDepartment of Mathematics and Computer Science, Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3495-8359

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A central challenge in population genetics is the detection of genomic footprints of selection. As machine learning tools including convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have become more sophisticated and applied more broadly, these provide a logical next step for increasing our power to learn and detect such patterns; indeed, CNNs trained on simulated genome sequences have recently been shown to be highly effective at this task. Unlike previous approaches, which rely upon human-crafted summary statistics, these methods are able to be applied directly to raw genomic data, allowing them to potentially learn new signatures that, if well-understood, could improve the current theory surrounding selective sweeps. Towards this end, we examine a representative CNN from the literature, paring it down to the minimal complexity needed to maintain comparable performance; this low-complexity CNN allows us to directly interpret the learned evolutionary signatures. We then validate these patterns in more complex models using metrics that evaluate feature importance. Our findings reveal that preprocessing steps, which determine how the population genetic data is presented to the model, play a central role in the learned prediction method. This results in models that mimic previously-defined summary statistics; in one case, the summary statistic itself achieves similarly high accuracy. For evolutionary processes that are less well understood than selective sweeps, we hope this provides an initial framework for using CNNs in ways that go beyond simply achieving high classification performance. Instead, we propose that CNNs might be useful as tools for learning novel patterns that can translate to easy-to-implement summary statistics available to a wider community of researchers.

Indexed as

Machine LearningNeural Networks, ComputerBiological EvolutionGenetics, PopulationGenomicsHumans

Identifiers

PMID38011281
PMCPMC10703409

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.