Dataset Information

Revisiting Nested Group Testing Procedures: New Results, Comparisons, and Robustness.

ABSTRACT: Group testing has its origin in the identification of syphilis in the U.S. army during World War II. Much of the theoretical framework of group testing was developed starting in the late 1950s, with continued work into the 1990s. Recently, with the advent of new laboratory and genetic technologies, there has been an increasing interest in group testing designs for cost saving purposes. In this article, we compare different nested designs, including Dorfman, Sterrett and an optimal nested procedure obtained through dynamic programming. To elucidate these comparisons, we develop closed-form expressions for the optimal Sterrett procedure and provide a concise review of the prior literature for other commonly used procedures. We consider designs where the prevalence of disease is known as well as investigate the robustness of these procedures, when it is incorrectly assumed. This article provides a technical presentation that will be of interest to researchers as well as from a pedagogical perspective. Supplementary material for this article available online.

SUBMITTER: Malinovsky Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6896989 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Revisiting Nested Group Testing Procedures: New Results, Comparisons, and Robustness.

Malinovsky Yaakov Y Albert Paul S PS

The American statistician 20180604 2

Group testing has its origin in the identification of syphilis in the U.S. army during World War II. Much of the theoretical framework of group testing was developed starting in the late 1950s, with continued work into the 1990s. Recently, with the advent of new laboratory and genetic technologies, there has been an increasing interest in group testing designs for cost saving purposes. In this article, we compare different nested designs, including Dorfman, Sterrett and an optimal nested procedu ...[more]

PMID: 31814627

Similar Datasets

Project description:Robustness and evolvability are highly intertwined properties of biological systems. The relationship between these properties determines how biological systems are able to withstand mutations and show variation in response to them. Computational studies have explored the relationship between these two properties using neutral networks of RNA sequences (genotype) and their secondary structures (phenotype) as a model system. However, these studies have assumed every mutation to a sequence to be equally likely; the differences in the likelihood of the occurrence of various mutations, and the consequence of probabilistic nature of the mutations in such a system have previously been ignored. Associating probabilities to mutations essentially results in the weighting of genotype space. We here perform a comparative analysis of weighted and unweighted neutral networks of RNA sequences, and subsequently explore the relationship between robustness and evolvability. We show that assuming an equal likelihood for all mutations (as in an unweighted network), underestimates robustness and overestimates evolvability of a system. In spite of discarding this assumption, we observe that a negative correlation between sequence (genotype) robustness and sequence evolvability persists, and also that structure (phenotype) robustness promotes structure evolvability, as observed in earlier studies using unweighted networks. We also study the effects of base composition bias on robustness and evolvability. Particularly, we explore the association between robustness and evolvability in a sequence space that is AU-rich-sequences with an AU content of 80% or higher, compared to a normal (unbiased) sequence space. We find that evolvability of both sequences and structures in an AU-rich space is lesser compared to the normal space, and robustness higher. We also observe that AU-rich populations evolving on neutral networks of phenotypes, can access less phenotypic variation compared to normal populations evolving on neutral networks.

Project description:Consumer testing assays a panel's liking of a food or other sensory stimulus. However, liking can be influenced by mood, with people feeling more uncomfortable, or more unhappy reporting lower liking ratings than those in a higher affect. Though consumer testing typically takes place as a central location test (CLT, usually in a set of standardized sensory booths), the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a global pivot to home use tests (HUTs), where panelists can taste and smell samples unmasked more safely while in their own homes. Unfortunately, as this situation differs in many ways to a central location test, this puts the validity of longitudinal comparisons of liking scores under question. Further, as people across the globe report feelings of worry, unease, and stress during the pandemic, this may present a second source of variation in affect with previous years. We tested a set of snack bar samples both at home and in a central location, in repeated measures with the same panel, to test the validity of comparisons across locations. We further compared CLT results to those when testing the same samples in a previous year. Finally, we performed a meta-analysis of existing data on this subject. While liking behavior in CLTs did not differ between years, panelists rated some samples higher when in their own homes, in line with results from the meta-analysis of previous reports. Interestingly, panelists in the study also assigned fewer penalties in the HUT, implying a less analytical mindset when in the home. Results suggest that care should be taken when comparing results taken at home during the COVID-19 pandemic to those taken previously in a central location. PRACTICAL APPLICATION: Consumer testing is applied in the food industry to evaluate a panelist's liking for a food product or stimulus. However, liking is also dependent on factors extrinsic to the samples tested. Thus, with the switch to in-home testing due to COVID-19, we compared liking scores from in-home and central locations testing, with higher scores common in HUTs.

Dataset Information

Revisiting Nested Group Testing Procedures: New Results, Comparisons, and Robustness.

Publications

Revisiting Nested Group Testing Procedures: New Results, Comparisons, and Robustness.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets