ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2024
Metadata-guided feature disentanglement for functional genomics.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Multiple instance fine-mapping: Predicting causal regulatory variants with a deep sequence model.PLoS genetics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
With the development of high-throughput technologies, genomics datasets rapidly grow in size, including functional genomics data. This has allowed the training of large Deep Learning (DL) models to predict epigenetic readouts, such as protein binding or histone modifications, from genome sequences. However, large dataset sizes come at a price of data consistency, often aggregating results from a large number of studies, conducted under varying experimental conditions. While data from large-scale consortia are useful as they allow studying the effects of different biological conditions, they can also contain unwanted biases from confounding experimental factors. Here, we introduce Metadata-guided Feature Disentanglement (MFD)-an approach that allows disentangling biologically relevant features from potential technical biases. MFD incorporates target metadata into model training, by conditioning weights of the model output layer on different experimental factors. It then separates the factors into disjoint groups and enforces independence of the corresponding feature subspaces with an adversarially learned penalty. We show that the metadata-driven disentanglement approach allows for better model introspection, by connecting latent features to experimental factors, without compromising, or even improving performance in downstream tasks, such as enhancer prediction, or genetic variant discovery. The code will be made available at https://github.com/HealthML/MFD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.