ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2021
Interpretable artificial neural networks incorporating Bayesian alphabet models for genome-wide prediction and association studies.
Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of QTL number, heritability and reference population size on the benefit of machine learning models over GBLUP in genomic prediction.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2026Article
- 2NPLGBM: a genomic model that merges the strengths of classical and machine learning methods in genomic prediction.Plant methods · 2026Article
- Predicting maize hybrid performance with machine learning and a locus-specific weighted degree of dominance transformation.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Can classical statistics and deep learning converge on explainable, causally driven target discovery?DNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes · 2025Review
- Incorporating information of causal variants in genomic prediction using GBLUP or machine learning models in a simulated livestock population.Journal of animal science and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Improving the accuracy of genomic prediction in dairy cattle using the biologically annotated neural networks framework.Journal of animal science and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Predictive ability of multi-population genomic prediction methods of phenotypes for reproduction traits in Chinese and Austrian pigs.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2024Article
- Interpreting single-step genomic evaluation as a neural network of three layers: pedigree, genotypes, and phenotypes.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2023Article
- Advancing artificial intelligence to help feed the world.Nature biotechnology · 2023Article
- Extend mixed models to multilayer neural networks for genomic prediction including intermediate omics data.Genetics · 2022Article
- XSim version 2: simulation of modern breeding programs.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2022Article
- NeuralLasso: Neural Networks Meet Lasso in Genomic Prediction.Frontiers in plant science · 2022Article
- Predicting phenotypes from genetic, environment, management, and historical data using CNNs.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In conventional linear models for whole-genome prediction and genome-wide association studies (GWAS), it is usually assumed that the relationship between genotypes and phenotypes is linear. Bayesian neural networks have been used to account for non-linearity such as complex genetic architectures. Here, we introduce a method named NN-Bayes, where "NN" stands for neural networks, and "Bayes" stands for Bayesian Alphabet models, including a collection of Bayesian regression models such as BayesA, BayesB, BayesC, and Bayesian LASSO. NN-Bayes incorporates Bayesian Alphabet models into non-linear neural networks via hidden layers between single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and observed traits. Thus, NN-Bayes attempts to improve the performance of genome-wide prediction and GWAS by accommodating non-linear relationships between the hidden nodes and the observed trait, while maintaining genomic interpretability through the Bayesian regression models that connect the SNPs to the hidden nodes. For genomic interpretability, the posterior distribution of marker effects in NN-Bayes is inferred by Markov chain Monte Carlo approaches and used for inference of association through posterior inclusion probabilities and window posterior probability of association. In simulation studies with dominance and epistatic effects, performance of NN-Bayes was significantly better than conventional linear models for both GWAS and whole-genome prediction, and the differences on prediction accuracy were substantial in magnitude. In real-data analyses, for the soy dataset, NN-Bayes achieved significantly higher prediction accuracies than conventional linear models, and results from other four different species showed that NN-Bayes had similar prediction performance to linear models, which is potentially due to the small sample size. Our NN-Bayes is optimized for high-dimensional genomic data and implemented in an open-source package called "JWAS." NN-Bayes can lead to greater use of Bayesian neural networks to account for non-linear relationships due to its interpretability and computational performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.