PreprintCited by 3Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals

Detecting Genetic Interactions with Visible Neural Networks

Open access
van Hilten, Arno, Melograna, Federico, Fan, Bowen, Niessen, Wiro, van Steen, Kristel, Roshchupkin, Gennady·2024·bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)

Preprint — published as 10.1038/s42003-025-08157-x

Abstract

Non-linear interactions among single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), genes, and pathways play an important role in human diseases, but identifying these interactions is a challenging task. Neural networks are state-of-the-art predictors in many domains due to their ability to analyze big data and model complex patterns, including non-linear interactions. In genetics, visible neural networks are gaining popularity as they provide insight into the most important SNPs, genes and pathways for prediction. Visible neural networks use prior knowledge (e.g. gene and pathway annotations) to define the connections between nodes in the network, making them sparse and interpretable. Currently, most of these networks provide measures for the importance of SNPs, genes, and pathways but lack details on the nature of the interactions. In this paper, we explore different methods to detect non-linear interactions with visible neural networks. We adapted and sped up existing methods, created a comprehensive benchmark with simulated data from GAMETES and EpiGEN, and demonstrated that these methods can extract multiple types of interactions from trained visible neural networks. Finally, we applied these methods to a genome-wide case-control study of inflammatory bowel disease and found high consistency of the epistasis pairs candidates between the interpretation methods. The follow-up association test on these candidate pairs identified seven significant epistasis pairs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1101/2024.02.27.582086

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
van Hilten, A., Melograna, F., Fan, B., Niessen, W., van Steen, K., & Roshchupkin, G.
Affiliations
  • KU Leuven (BE)
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
  • Erasmus MC (NL)
Corresponding author
  • Melograna, Federico
  • Roshchupkin, Gennady
Venue
bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2024-02-29
OpenAlex
W4392352464
Cited by
3
References
5
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • IMAGINE - Repository of the Institute of molecular genetics and genetic engineering (University of Belgrade) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • European Commission (HORIZON2020, 813533, 860895)
  • ZonMw (1936320)
  • Stichting voor de Technische Wetenschappen
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Keywords
genetic interactions, epistasis, single nucleotide polymorphisms, nonlinear interactions, interpretability, benchmark, inflammatory bowel disease, case-control association, gametes

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review