Curtis Huttenhower | Searcharxiv

arXiv2019

Bayesian Mixed Effects Models for Zero-inflated Compositions in Microbiome Data Analysis

Detecting associations between microbial compositions and sample characteristics is one of the most important tasks in microbiome studies. Most of the existing methods apply univariate models to single microbial species separately, with adjustments for multiple hypothesis testing. We propose a Bayesian analysis for a generalized mixed effects linear model tailored to this application. The marginal prior on each microbial composition is a Dirichlet Process, and dependence across compositions is induced through a linear combination of individual covariates, such as disease biomarkers or the subject's age, and latent factors. The latent factors capture residual variability and their dimensionality is learned from the data in a fully Bayesian procedure. The proposed model is tested in data analyses and simulation studies with zero-inflated compositions. In these settings, within each sample, a large proportion of counts per microbial species are equal to zero. In our Bayesian model a priori the probability of compositions with absent microbial species is strictly positive. We propose an efficient algorithm to sample from the posterior and visualizations of model parameters which reveal associations between covariates and microbial compositions. We evaluate the proposed method in simulation studies, and then analyze a microbiome dataset for infants with type 1 diabetes which contains a large proportion of zeros in the sample-specific microbial compositions.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2015

Bayesian nonparametric cross-study validation of prediction methods

We consider comparisons of statistical learning algorithms using multiple data sets, via leave-one-in cross-study validation: each of the algorithms is trained on one data set; the resulting model is then validated on each remaining data set. This poses two statistical challenges that need to be addressed simultaneously. The first is the assessment of study heterogeneity, with the aim of identifying a subset of studies within which algorithm comparisons can be reliably carried out. The second is the comparison of algorithms using the ensemble of data sets. We address both problems by integrating clustering and model comparison. We formulate a Bayesian model for the array of cross-study validation statistics, which defines clusters of studies with similar properties and provides the basis for meaningful algorithm comparison in the presence of study heterogeneity. We illustrate our approach through simulations involving studies with varying severity of systematic errors, and in the context of medical prognosis for patients diagnosed with cancer, using high-throughput measurements of the transcriptional activity of the tumor's genes.

stat.AP↗