ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2025
Ensemble of Bayesian alphabets via constraint weight optimization strategy improves genomic prediction accuracy.
Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2025. 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.
- OptimGS: a dual integrative genomic prediction framework for improving cold stress tolerance in wheat.Briefings in bioinformatics · 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
This study proposes a weight optimization-based ensemble framework aimed at improving genomic prediction accuracy. It incorporates 8 Bayesian models-BayesA, BayesB, BayesC, BayesBpi, BayesCpi, BayesR, BayesL, and BayesRR in the ensemble framework, where the weight assigned to each model was optimized using genetic algorithm method. The performance of the ensemble model, named EnBayes, was evaluated on 18 datasets from 4 crop species, showing improved prediction accuracy compared to individual Bayesian models. New objective functions were proposed to improve prediction accuracy in terms of both Pearson's correlation coefficient and mean square error. The accuracy of the ensemble model was found to be associated with the number of models considered in the framework, where a few more accurate models achieved similar accuracy as that of more number of less accurate models. Additionally, over-bias and under-bias models also influenced the biasness of the ensemble model's accuracy. The study also explored a meta-learning approach using Bayesian models as base learners and random forest, quantile regression forest, and ridge regression as meta-learners, with the EnBayes model outperforming this approach. While traditional genomic prediction models GBLUP and rrBLUP and machine learning models support vector machine, random forest, extreme gradient boosting, and light gradient boosting were included in the ensemble framework in addition to Bayesian models, the ensemble model achieved higher accuracy as compared to the individual Bayesian, BLUP, and machine learning models. We believe that EnBayes would contribute significantly to ongoing efforts on improving genomic prediction accuracy.
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.