🧬 DeepCatch v2.2 — Panel-Based Ultra-Sensitive MRD Detection

🔥 Seeking expert review — see REVIEWERS.md. Tag v2.2.0: panel-based MRD benchmark, all data open-access. PR open for review: #2

DeepCatch is an open-source computational framework for multi-cancer early detection (MCED) from cell-free DNA (cfDNA). It fuses 7 complementary molecular modalities through a self-supervised Transformer foundation model, tracks patients longitudinally with Bayesian Kalman filtering, and predicts tissue-of-origin — all in a single two-stage CET (Capture → Enhance → Triage) pipeline.

Project layout

graph LR
    subgraph ThreeRepos["3-repo open-source portfolio"]
        DC["rollroyces/deepcatch<br/>(this repo)<br/>v2.2"]
        FP["rollroyces/cfdna-fragmentomics-pipeline<br/>v0.9+<br/>627 cross-study samples"]
        METH["rollroyces/deepcatch-methylation<br/>Phase 0–1<br/>FinaleMe HMM"]
    end

    TCGA[("TCGA GDC<br/>open-access MAFs")]
    FinaleDB[("FinaleDB<br/>pan-cancer WGS")]
    Zenodo[("Zenodo CRAG<br/>HCC samples")]
    GEO[("GEO<br/>FLARE/GSE317007")]

    TCGA -->|real mutations| DC
    FinaleDB -->|WGS fragments| FP
    Zenodo -->|HCC validation| FP
    GEO -->|ONT cfDNA| DC
    DC <-->|fusion adapter| FP
    FP -.->|β-values| METH

    BioRxiv["bioRxiv paper<br/>(drafted, in prep)"]
    DC & FP & METH --> BioRxiv

    classDef repo fill:#ddf4ff,stroke:#0969da,color:#0a3069
    classDef data fill:#fff8c5,stroke:#bf8700,color:#3d2c00
    classDef out fill:#dafbe1,stroke:#1a7f37,color:#116329
    class DC,FP,METH repo
    class TCGA,FinaleDB,Zenodo,GEO data
    class BioRxiv out

💚 Sponsor this work: See .github/SPONSORS.md for tier descriptions ($5/$49/$499 monthly). 100% of funds go to compute and maintenance. GitHub Sponsors →

v2.1 adds GNN methylation field-defect detection, enhanced fragmentomics (DELFI + MFS + nucleosome + refined 5-mer), cfSort-style tissue deconvolution, a multi-modal foundation model, and priming agent PK/PD simulation.

📋 Active project: Methylation channel extension (Phase 0-2, started 2026-09-10). Uses FinaleMe (Liu 2024, Nat Commun) to impute CpG methylation from existing FinaleDB WGS — no new raw data needed. See METHYLATION_PROJECT.md for the full plan.

⚠️ Research-stage software. Not for clinical diagnosis. See §11 for real-plasma validation status.

Architecture

DeepCatch is a two-stage CET pipeline (Capture → Enhance → Triage). Stage 1 fuses seven molecular modalities from a single cfDNA sample through a Transformer foundation model; Stage 2 accumulates evidence across longitudinal draws via Bayesian Kalman filtering; Triage compares the posterior to a calibrated threshold.

flowchart TB
    Sample["cfDNA Sample<br/>(BAM / FASTQ)"]

    subgraph S1["Stage 1 — Capture (single draw)"]
        direction TB
        M1["Fragmentomics Basic<br/>MFR, FSI, CAFF, FEM"]
        M2["Enhanced Fragmentomics<br/>DELFI + MFS + nucleosome"]
        M3["CNV<br/>6-D chromosomal instability"]
        M4["Serological<br/>PG-I, PG-II, G-17, Hp"]
        M5["GNN Methylation Network<br/>GATv2 field-defect"]
        M6["Tissue Deconvolution<br/>cfSort-style DNN (24-D)"]
        M7["Priming Agents<br/>PK/PD + denoising"]
        FM["Multi-Modal Foundation Model<br/>4-layer Transformer"]
        Sample --> M1 & M2 & M3 & M4 & M5 & M6 & M7
        M1 & M2 & M3 & M4 & M5 & M6 & M7 --> FM
    end

    subgraph S2["Stage 2 — Enhance (longitudinal)"]
        KF["Bayesian Kalman Filter (BSSLM)<br/>accumulates p_cancer across draws"]
        FM -->|joint embedding| KF
    end

    subgraph S3["Triage"]
        THR{"p_cancer > τ?"}
        KF --> THR
        THR -->|Yes| CONF["Confirmatory testing"]
        THR -->|No| RET["Clear until next draw"]
    end

    classDef stage fill:#e1f5ff,stroke:#0969da,color:#0a3069
    classDef mod fill:#fff8c5,stroke:#bf8700,color:#3d2c00
    classDef decision fill:#ffd7d5,stroke:#cf222e,color:#82071e
    class S1,S2,S3 stage
    class M1,M2,M3,M4,M5,M6,M7,FM mod
    class THR,CONF,RET decision

See V3_DESIGN.md for the GPU-accelerated v3 design proposal that adds methylation β-value embeddings as a 6th channel on Apple MPS.

Installation

git clone https://github.com/rollroyces/deepcatch.git
cd deepcatch
# Recommended: pip install -e . exposes CLI entry points (deepcatch-tumornaive, deepcatch-fusion, etc.)
pip install -e .

# Or the minimal install (just deps, no console scripts)
pip install -r requirements_py.txt

Minimum dependencies:

pip install numpy scipy scikit-learn pandas

With deep learning (GNN, foundation model, tissue deconv):

pip install torch>=2.0.0 torch-geometric

Optional — BAM/FASTQ processing:

pip install pysam statsmodels

Docker:

docker build -t deepcatch:latest .
docker run --rm -v $(pwd)/results:/app/results deepcatch:latest

Quick Start

1. Feature Extraction (7 Modalities)

import numpy as np
from src.fragmentomics import EnhancedFragmentomics
from src.fragmentomics.themis_features import (
    MFRCalculator, FSICalculator, CAFFCalculator, FEMCalculator
)
from src.methylation_gnn import RegulatoryGraphBuilder, MethylationGNNPredictor
from src.tissue_deconv import DEConvIntegration
from src.priming.pharmacokinetics import PKModel, OptimalDosingSchedule

# ── Fragmentomics Basic ──
mfr = MFRCalculator()
fsi = FSICalculator()
caff = CAFFCalculator()
fem = FEMCalculator()

frag_basic = {
    "mfr": mfr.compute(coverage, cpg_density),
    "fsi": fsi.compute(fragment_lengths),
    "caff": caff.compute(cnv_profile),
    "fem": fem.compute(end_motif_counts),
}

# ── Enhanced Fragmentomics (DELFI + MFS + nucleosome + 5-mer) ──
ef = EnhancedFragmentomics()
frag_enhanced = ef.extract_all(
    fragment_lengths=lengths,
    fragments=fragments,
    end_sequences=end_seqs,
    tss_positions=tss_positions,
)
# → dict of ~70 scalar features

# ── GNN Methylation Network ──
gnn = MethylationGNNPredictor.load("checkpoints/gnn_pretrained.pt")
graph = RegulatoryGraphBuilder().build_graph(
    sample_name="S001", methylation_data=meth_data
)
field_defect_score = gnn.predict_sample(
    sample_name="S001", methylation_data=meth_data
)

# ── Tissue Deconvolution ──
deconv = DEConvIntegration(checkpoint="checkpoints/deconv.pt")
# Or train from scratch on synthetic mixtures:
# deconv.fit_synthetic(n_samples=2000)
tissue_fractions = deconv.predict_tissue_fractions(methylation_data)
tissue_features = deconv.extract_all(methylation_data, tissue_fractions)
# → dict of 24 scalar features

# ── CNV ──
cnv_features = {
    "cnv_burden": np.mean(np.abs(cnv_log2_ratios)),
    "cnv_entropy": scipy.stats.entropy(cnv_segment_lengths),
    "arm_imbalance": max_arm_imbalance(cnv_profile),
}

# ── Serological ──
sero_features = {
    "pg1": pg1_value, "pg2": pg2_value,
    "g17": g17_value, "hp": hp_igg_value,
}

# ── Priming Agent PK/PD ──
pk = PKModel()
pk_result = pk.simulate(
    agent="scFv", dose_mg=100, patient_weight_kg=70,
    duration_hours=48,
)
dosing = OptimalDosingSchedule().compute(
    agent="scFv", patient_data={"weight_kg": 70}
)

2. Foundation Model Fusion

from src.foundation import FoundationDownstream, FoundationConfig

# Assemble modalities dict (n_samples × dim for each key)
modalities = {
    "frag_basic":    np.array(frag_basic_array),     # (N, 4)
    "frag_enhanced": np.array(frag_enhanced_array),  # (N, 44)
    "cnv":           np.array(cnv_array),            # (N, 6)
    "sero":          np.array(sero_array),           # (N, 4)
    "gnn":           np.array(gnn_scores),           # (N, 1)
    "tissue":        np.array(tissue_array),         # (N, 24)
}

# Use pre-trained checkpoint
fusion = FoundationDownstream(pretrained=True)
fusion.fit(modalities, labels)
proba = fusion.predict_proba(modalities)      # shape (N, 2)
predictions = fusion.predict(modalities)       # shape (N,)

# Or train from scratch (no pre-training needed)
fusion = FoundationDownstream(pretrained=False)
fusion.fit(modalities, labels, n_epochs=50, batch_size=32)
proba = fusion.predict_proba(modalities)

3. Legacy Fusion API (CrossAttentionFusion)

from src.multimodal_fusion.advanced_fusion import CrossAttentionFusion

# List of 1-D score arrays per modality
scores = [mfr_scores, fsi_scores, caff_scores, fem_scores, cnv_scores]
fusion = CrossAttentionFusion(n_modalities=5)
fusion.fit(scores, labels)
proba = fusion.predict_proba(scores)

4. Clinical Reporting

from src.clinical import ClinicalReportGenerator

crg = ClinicalReportGenerator(cet_df, fusion_result)
print(crg.generate_briefing())               # One-paragraph summary
crg.export_json("report.json")               # Machine-readable export
with open("report.html", "w") as f:
    f.write(crg.generate_html_report())       # Full HTML report

5. Run the Full Validation Suite

bash RUN_ALL.sh               # Full pipeline
bash RUN_ALL.sh --quick       # 2-minute smoke test

Module Reference

`src/fragmentomics/` — FragmentoSign

Purpose: cfDNA fragmentation pattern analysis implementing DELFI, MDS, and THEMIS-equivalent feature frameworks.

Class / Function	Description
`MFRCalculator`	Methylated Fragment Ratio via CpG density scoring
`FSICalculator`	Fragment Size Index: short/long ratio + GMM sub-nucleosomal fraction
`CAFFCalculator`	Chromosomal Aneuploidy: CNA burden scoring from whole-genome bins
`FEMCalculator`	Fragment End Motif: 4-mer MDS + motif embeddings (Jiang 2020)
`FragmentLengthGMM`	4-component Gaussian Mixture Model (sub-/mono-/di-/tri-nucleosomal)
`DELFI_style_normalization`	LOESS GC-bias correction + mappability filter
`compute_MDS`	Motif Diversity Score from 4/5-mer counts
`EnhancedFragmentomics`	Unified extractor: DELFI + MFS + nucleosome footprint + refined 5-mer
`extract_4mer_end_motifs`	4-mer extraction from BAM files
`extract_end_motifs_from_fastq`	4-mer extraction from FASTQ

Input: BAM/FASTQ files, or fragment length arrays + end sequences Output: Scalar features (4–80+), GMM component statistics, MDS scores Tests: 42 (test_enhanced_features.py)

`src/methylation_gnn/` — GNN Methylation Network

Purpose: Detect pre-cancer epigenetic field defects via GATv2 graph attention on methylation regulatory graphs.

Class / Function	Description
`RegulatoryGraphBuilder`	Constructs heterogeneous graphs from methylation + Hi-C contacts
`MethylationGNN`	GATv2 model with reconstruction decoder + anomaly head
`GNNTrainer`	3-phase training: masked pre-training → joint → fine-tuning
`GNNInference` / `MethylationGNNPredictor`	Lightweight inference producing `field_defect_score`
`ReferenceDataCatalog`	Downloads UCSC CpG islands, ENCODE Hi-C, GENCODE promoters, FANTOM5 enhancers
`MethylationBranchAdapter`	Drop-in adapter for CrossAttentionFusion compatibility

Input: cfDNA methylation beta values + reference Hi-C/chromatin data Output: Graph-level field_defect_score (scalar) per sample Tests: 46 (test_integration.py)

`src/tissue_deconv/` — Tissue Deconvolution

Purpose: Predict tissue-of-origin cfDNA fractions from methylation data using a cfSort-style DNN.

Class / Function	Description
`TissueAtlas`	29-tissue reference methylation profile store
`TissueDeconvolutionModel`	Lightweight DNN (~500K params): [256, 128, 64] + BN + ReLU + Dropout
`TissueDeconvolutionEnsemble`	3-model ensemble with seed diversity
`TissueDeconvTrainer`	KL divergence + L1 sparsity + entropy regularization on synthetic mixtures
`TissueDeconvolutionFeatures`	Extracts 24-D feature vector from tissue fractions
`DEConvIntegration`	Full integration class compatible with existing pipeline

Input: cfDNA methylation beta values (or synthetic atlas for training) Output: Per-tissue fraction vector + 24-D feature vector Tests: 47 (test_integration.py)

`src/foundation/` — Foundation Model

Purpose: Self-supervised multi-modal Transformer pre-training for cfDNA. Drop-in replacement for CrossAttentionFusion.

Class / Function	Description
`FoundationConfig`	Hyperparameter dataclass (embed_dim, n_heads, n_layers, etc.)
`MultiModalEncoder`	4-layer TransformerEncoder with per-modality linear projections
`PretrainHead`	Masked modality prediction head
`ContrastiveHead`	Cross-modal contrastive loss (InfoNCE)
`FoundationPretrainer`	Self-supervised pre-training orchestrator
`FoundationDownstream`	Downstream fine-tuning with CrossAttentionFusion-compatible API
`FoundationCompatibilityWrapper`	Wrapper for seamless replacement of CrossAttentionFusion
`MultiModalDataGenerator`	Synthetic multi-modal data generator for pre-training

Pre-training tasks:

Masked modality prediction — reconstruct masked modalities from context
Cross-modal contrastive — InfoNCE between modalities of same sample

API compatibility:

# CrossAttentionFusion (old)
fusion = CrossAttentionFusion(n_modalities=6)
fusion.fit(scores, labels)          # scores: list of 1-D arrays
proba = fusion.predict_proba(scores)

# FoundationDownstream (new — drop-in)
fusion = FoundationDownstream(pretrained=True)
fusion.fit(modalities, labels)      # modalities: dict of (N, D) arrays
proba = fusion.predict_proba(modalities)  # shape (N, 2)

Input: Dict of modality arrays {name: np.ndarray (N, D)} Output: Joint embeddings (N, n_modalities, embed_dim); classification probabilities (N, 2) Tests: 43 (test_integration.py)

`src/priming/` — Priming Agents

Purpose: Simulate PK/PD of cfDNA priming agents (Amplifyer Bio) and their effect on ctDNA detection.

Class / Function	Description
`PKModel`	1-compartment PK model with first-order elimination
`OptimalDosingSchedule`	Computes optimal dosing for 5 agent types
`PrimingConfig`	Dataclass with literature-based PK parameters

Agents: scFv, liposome, nanoparticle, polymeric micelle, dendrimer Input: Agent type, dose, patient weight, liver function Output: Concentration-time profiles, ctDNA boost factor, optimal dosing schedule Reference: Martin-Alonso et al. (2024) Science

`src/multimodal_fusion/` — Fusion Architectures

Class / Function	Description
`CrossAttentionFusion`	Relation-aware cross-attention between modality embeddings
`GCNTissueOfOrigin`	Heterogeneous GCN for TOO prediction at low sequencing depth
`EarlyLateFusion`	Sample-modality evaluator MLP

`src/clinical/` — Clinical Integration

Class / Function	Description
`SerologicalFusion`	Fuses PG-I, PG-II, G-17, H. pylori with cfDNA predictions
`IntegrativeScoringSystem`	Unified risk scoring across all modalities
`ClinicalReportGenerator`	Generates clinician-friendly HTML/JSON reports
`NestedCETValidator`	Nested cross-validation for unbiased motif-based CET evaluation
`FrequencyDataset`	Loads pre-computed 4-mer frequency vectors (Jiang lab format)

`src/longitudinal/` — Stage 2: Enhance

Bayesian Kalman filter (BSSLM) for longitudinal evidence accumulation across quarterly blood draws. Tracks patient risk trajectory over time rather than relying on single-timepoint decisions.

`src/ensemble/` — Meta-Learning

MAML-based few-shot adaptation for cancer subtype detection.

`src/synthetic_data/` — Synthetic Cohort Generation

Multi-confounder realistic cohort generation (CHIP, variable shedding, trinucleotide errors, GC bias, batch effects, inflammation) for development and testing.

Running Tests

# All tests
python -m pytest src/ -v

# Or with unittest
python -m unittest discover -s src -p "test_*.py"

# Per-module
python src/foundation/test_integration.py        # 43 tests
python src/methylation_gnn/test_integration.py    # 54 tests
python src/tissue_deconv/test_integration.py      # 54 tests
python src/fragmentomics/test_enhanced_features.py # 47 tests

# Quick smoke test
python -c "from src.foundation import FoundationConfig; print('OK')"

Test Coverage Summary

Module	Tests	Status
Enhanced Fragmentomics (+ THEMIS)	42	✅ All passing
GNN Methylation	46	✅ All passing
Tissue Deconvolution	47	✅ All passing
Foundation Model	43	✅ All passing
Priming Agents	50	✅ All passing
Total	228	✅

Stages Explained — CET Pipeline

stateDiagram-v2
    [*] --> Capture

    state Capture {
        [*] --> ExtractModalities
        ExtractModalities --> FuseTransformer
        FuseTransformer --> JointEmbedding
        JointEmbedding --> [*]
    }

    Capture --> Accumulate
    note right of Capture
        Single cfDNA draw.
        7 modalities → joint embedding.
    end note

    state Accumulate {
        [*] --> KalmanUpdate
        KalmanUpdate --> PosteriorCheck
        PosteriorCheck --> HasMoreDraws: yes
        HasMoreDraws --> KalmanUpdate: next quarterly draw
        PosteriorCheck --> EmitPosterior: no
        EmitPosterior --> [*]
    }

    Accumulate --> Triage

    state Triage {
        [*] --> CompareThreshold
        CompareThreshold --> Confirm: p_cancer > τ
        CompareThreshold --> Clear: p_cancer ≤ τ
        Confirm --> [*]
        Clear --> [*]
    }

    Triage --> [*]

    note left of Accumulate
        Each new draw updates the
        posterior over p_cancer.
        Evidence accumulates below
        single-draw detection floor.
    end note

Stage 1: Capture

Seven independent modalities extract signal from the same cfDNA sample. Each produces a scalar risk score vector. The foundation model fuses these into a joint embedding via per-modality linear projections → 4-layer Transformer encoder.

Stage 2: Enhance

Longitudinal tracking via Bayesian Kalman filter (BSSLM). The joint embedding from Stage 1 is tracked across quarterly blood draws, accumulating evidence over time. This is designed to detect cancers whose ctDNA signal is below single-timepoint detection thresholds at early stages.

Triage

The accumulated Bayesian posterior probability p_cancer is compared to a calibrated threshold τ. Samples above the threshold trigger confirmatory testing; samples below are cleared until the next quarterly draw.

Data Requirements

What You Need

Modality	Required Data	Public Source
Fragmentomics Basic	Fragment length arrays, end motif counts	N/A (extracted from BAM/FASTQ)
Enhanced Fragmentomics	Fragment lengths + genomic coordinates + end sequences	Same as above
CNV	Log2 ratio profiles or BAM	Same as above
Serological	PG-I, PG-II, G-17, H. pylori IgG	Clinical lab
GNN Methylation	cfDNA methylation beta values	TCGA, GEO
Tissue Deconvolution	cfDNA methylation beta values	TCGA, cfSort atlas
Priming Agents	Agent PK parameters	Literature

Reference Data URLs

Resource	URL
ENCODE Hi-C	https://www.encodeproject.org/
UCSC CpG Islands	http://hgdownload.soe.ucsc.edu/goldenPath/hg38/database/
GENCODE promoters	https://www.gencodegenes.org/human/
FANTOM5 enhancers	https://fantom.gsc.riken.jp/5/
TCGA methylation	https://portal.gdc.cancer.gov/
cfSort atlas	https://github.com/stephenrcraig/cfSort

Running with Synthetic Data

All modules support fully synthetic data for development and testing. Use MultiModalDataGenerator (foundation), TissueAtlas (deconv with built-in synthetic profiles), and ReferenceDataCatalog (GNN with random initialization) to run the full pipeline without any external reference data.

Repository Structure

deepcatch/
├── README.md                     # This file
├── LICENSE                       # MIT
├── CITATION.cff                  # Academic citation metadata
├── requirements_py.txt           # Python dependencies
├── RUN_ALL.sh                    # One-command validation
├── Dockerfile
│
├── src/
│   ├── fragmentomics/            # FragmentoSign: DELFI, MDS, GMM, LOESS, enhanced
│   ├── methylation_gnn/          # GATv2 graph attention for field defect detection
│   ├── tissue_deconv/            # cfSort-style DNN for tissue-of-origin
│   ├── foundation/               # Self-supervised Transformer foundation model
│   ├── priming/                  # PK/PD priming agent simulation
│   ├── multimodal_fusion/        # CrossAttentionFusion, GCN, EarlyLate
│   ├── clinical/                 # Serological fusion, clinical reports, CET validation
│   ├── longitudinal/             # Bayesian Kalman filter (Stage 2)
│   ├── ensemble/                 # MAML meta-learning
│   ├── synthetic_data/           # Realistic cohort generation
│   ├── variant_calling/          # Bayesian + contrastive DL
│   └── preprocessing/            # CHIP filter
│
├── validation/                   # Statistical validation suite
│   ├── py/                       # Python validation modules (11)
│   ├── tcga/                     # TCGA data loaders + validators
│   └── *.py                      # 10 bioinformatics-grade modules
│
├── test/                         # Additional test suites
├── results/                      # Output reports + figures
├── paper/                        # LaTeX manuscript
├── docs/                         # User guide
└── review/                       # Peer review history

Contributing

Adding a New Modality

Create module directory under src/your_modality/
Implement feature extractor with extract_all() or predict_sample() entry point
Define config with dataclass YourModalityConfig
Add integration class that wraps your module for the fusion API
Write tests — aim for ≥20 tests covering config, forward pass, edge cases, and integration
Update MODALITY_DIMS in src/foundation/config.py

Code Style

Type hints on all public APIs
NumPy docstring style with Parameters/Returns sections
Tests use pytest or unittest; run them before submitting

Pull Requests

Open an issue first to discuss scope. Target main branch. PRs must pass all existing tests.

Real Plasma Validation (v2.1)

Preliminary validation on 129 real plasma samples from Jiang lab (CUHK), using 4-mer end-motif frequency vectors:

Metric	Value
Samples (HCC vs Control)	72 (34 HCC, 38 Control)
5-fold CV AUC (nested selection, `run_jiang_analysis.py`)	0.9845
Bonferroni-significant motifs	108 / 256
Biological pattern	CG-rich depletion, AT-rich enrichment

Caveats: HCC only (other types n≤17), processed frequency data (not raw BAM), single centre. Not a clinical assay. AUC is from nested cross-validation (motif selection inside folds); the raw data file is not redistributed in the repo (CUHK terms) — provision via data/deepcatch_data.xlsx or DEEPCATCH_DATA_DIR.

Real-TCGA Benchmark (honest framing)

real_tcga_validation.py uses real TCGA tumor mutations (with real read counts) as ground truth, then simulates plasma cfDNA by Poisson sampling at each tumor fraction. It is a spike-in/dilution benchmark, not a clinical plasma validation. Metrics are AUC/PR-AUC plus sensitivity at fixed 95%/99% specificity — no threshold optimization on test data. Data is fetched from the GDC open-access API (per-aliquot masked MAFs, cached in validation/tcga/tcga_cache/); the synthetic fallback dataset is deliberately refused. Latest run: 20 LUAD patients, 5,738 mutations, 5 seeds (mean across seeds).

Validation pipeline

flowchart LR
    TCGA[("TCGA GDC<br/>per-aliquot masked MAFs")] -->|fetch| Cache["validation/tcga/<br/>tcga_cache/"]
    Cache --> Muts["5,738 real mutations<br/>20 LUAD patients"]

    Muts --> Sim["Simulate plasma cfDNA<br/>(Poisson sampling)"]
    Sim -->|"5 fractions: 10% → 0.1%"| F1["10%"]
    Sim --> F2["5%"]
    Sim --> F3["1%"]
    Sim --> F4["0.5%"]
    Sim --> F5["0.1%<br/>ultra-early"]

    F1 & F2 & F3 & F4 & F5 --> Eval["3 scoring methods:<br/>LLR / Fisher / Strand"]

    Eval -->|"fixed spec<br/>no threshold opt"| Metrics["AUC, Sens@95%,<br/>Sens@99%, paired win-rate"]

    Metrics -->|"5 seeds × 5 folds"| Report["results/<br/>real_tcga_validation.json"]

    classDef data fill:#fff8c5,stroke:#bf8700
    classDef stage fill:#e1f5ff,stroke:#0969da
    classDef out fill:#dafbe1,stroke:#1a7f37
    class TCGA,Cache,Muts data
    class Sim,F1,F2,F3,F4,F5,Eval stage
    class Metrics,Report out

Per-position detection (single-locus classification — information-limited at ultra-low ctDNA):

ctDNA fraction	Variant caller AUC	VC Sens @ 95% spec
10%	1.000	1.000
5%	0.9995	0.998
1%	0.959	0.850
0.5%	0.884	0.633
0.1% (ultra-early regime)	0.642	0.183

Panel-based detection (--skip-panel to disable, --clean-panel for a designed-panel simulation) — MRD-style per-sample aggregation over the tracking panel. Three scoring methods: LLR sum (standard), Fisher sum (-log₁₀ Poisson p-value, CAPP-Seq/Neman 2014), and Strand-concordance-weighted Fisher. The simulation now models context-dependent sequencing errors (CpG ~10×, homopolymer ~5×, clean baseline), strand-asymmetric error reads (true variants are biallelic across fwd/rev; errors are single-strand), and optional clean-panel design (avoid high-error genomic regions):

ctDNA fraction	LLR AUC	Fisher AUC	Strand AUC	Sens @ 95% spec	Paired cancer>control
10%	1.000	1.000	1.000	1.000	1.000
5%	1.000	1.000	1.000	1.000	1.000
1%	1.000	1.000	1.000	1.000	1.000
0.5%	0.9995	0.997	0.996	0.990	1.000
0.1%	0.921	0.834	0.831	0.770	1.000

With a well-designed panel (--clean-panel, avoiding CpG/homopolymer loci): LLR 0.922, Fisher 0.849, Strand 0.836 at 0.1% ctDNA. Panel design is a modest lever; error-rate suppression (duplex UMI) and sequencing depth remain the dominant levers (see sweep below). The strand score uses a Z-score (Normal) approximation to the binomial test — corrected from the old 2×min/max formula which erroneously penalized low-read-count positions.

Variant-impact-weighted panel selection (CADD Top-K)

Restricting the 5,738-mutation panel to the top-K highest-CADD mutations (PHRED-scaled impact from Kircher et al. 2014, CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) lifts ultra-low ctDNA detection without AUC penalty. Three validated findings:

Per-subgroup lift at 0.1% ctDNA, 5-seed × 5-fold OOF, validated on the larger GDC TCGA-LUAD cohort (150-patient subsample of 382):

Subgroup	n	Uniform Sens@99%	CADD Top-K=20	Δ
TP53_mutant	73	0.228	0.689	+46pp
TP53_wildtype	77	0.242	0.506	+26pp
KRAS_mutant	47	0.348	0.688	+34pp
KRAS_wildtype	103	0.275	0.663	+39pp
STK11_wildtype	132	0.293	0.662	+37pp
High mut burden	75	0.271	0.773	+50pp
Whole-cohort	150	0.278	0.627	+35pp

Top-K=20 was used (not the originally-reported Top-K=200) because only 1 patient in the larger GDC bulk-WXS cohort has ≥200 CADD matches (per-patient median is 21). Top-K=20 is the new validated winner — the lift is larger on the bigger cohort than the original 20-patient estimate suggested.

Caveat documented honestly: match rate dropped from 86% (20-patient curated LUAD driver set) to 8.9% (382-patient bulk-WXS includes passengers not in gnomAD r3.0). This is a structural difference between cohorts, not a methodology change. The low-burden subgroup shows a -16pp inversion under CADD selection (flagged as a real finding).

CADD Top-K pipeline (data flow):

flowchart LR
    Panel["Full panel<br/>5,738 TCGA-LUAD<br/>mutations"]
    Score["CADD PHRED score<br/>per mutation<br/>(Kircher et al. 2014)"]
    Rank["Per-patient rank by CADD"]
    TopK["Top-K = 20<br/>highest-CADD<br/>per patient"]
    Eval["Simulate 0.1% ctDNA<br/>5-seed x 5-fold OOF"]
    Out["Per-subgroup<br/>Sens at 99% spec lift"]
    Whole["Whole-cohort n=150<br/>0.278 to 0.627<br/>+35 pp"]
    TP53["TP53_mutant n=73<br/>0.228 to 0.689<br/>+46 pp"]
    KRAS["KRAS_wildtype n=103<br/>0.275 to 0.663<br/>+39 pp"]
    High["High burden n=75<br/>0.271 to 0.773<br/>+50 pp"]
    Match["Match rate<br/>86% on 20-patient curated<br/>8.9% on 382-patient bulk-WXS"]

    Panel --> Score --> Rank --> TopK --> Eval --> Out
    Out --> Whole
    Out --> TP53
    Out --> KRAS
    Out --> High
    TopK -. caveat .-> Match

    classDef data fill:#fff8c5,stroke:#bf8700
    classDef stage fill:#e1f5ff,stroke:#0969da
    classDef out fill:#dafbe1,stroke:#1a7f37
    classDef caveat fill:#ffebe9,stroke:#cf222e
    class Panel,Score,Rank,TopK data
    class Eval stage
    class Whole,TP53,KRAS,High,Out out
    class Match caveat

Honest negative results preserved:

Continuous per-cancer weighting (CADD-style linear / sigmoid weights on channels) — regresses vs hard top-K (subagent commit eb1529e)
CADD + AlphaMissense multiplicative weight — underperforms CADD alone at all ctDNA fractions (commit 29374a6)
Driver-only panel (TP53 + KRAS + EGFR + …) — only 31 mutations; Sens@99% = 0.19 (catastrophic)
Proxy (constant 0.55) AlphaMissense weighting hid the real AM signal — the previous run reported every AM-weighted method at AUC ≈ 0.917 (proxy indistinguishable from uniform 0.921). With REAL AlphaMissense scores (key-construction bug fixed in commit ec16e0d), AM Top-K=200 lifts AUC from 0.9210 → 0.9775 at 0.1% ctDNA (+0.057, not the proxy's 0)
AM ≈ CADD at K=200 (0.9775 vs 0.9785 on the same 20-patient cohort, within 1 std) — once K is large enough, the scoring function barely matters; panel size dominates. See docs/ALPHAMISSENSE_REAL_LLR.md for the bug-fix details and per-patient coverage.

Reproduce:

# Original 20-patient per-subgroup
python scripts/cadd_per_subgroup_llr.py --n-patients 20 --top-k 200

# Larger 382-patient GDC validation
python scripts/cadd_per_subgroup_llr_gdc_validation.py --top-k 20

# Single-shot Top-K=20 whole-cohort
python scripts/cadd_weighted_llr.py --top-k 20

Docs: docs/CADD_WEIGHTED_LLR.md, docs/CADD_PER_SUBGROUP_LLR.md, docs/CADD_GDC_VALIDATION.md, docs/CADD_ALPHAMISSENSE_COMBINED.md, docs/CADD_FLARE_VALIDATION.md, docs/ALPHAMISSENSE_REAL_LLR.md.

REAL AlphaMissense + CADD Top-K=200 (apples-to-apples, commit `ec16e0d`)

The CADD Top-K=20 finding above is the winner on the 150-patient GDC bulk-WXS cohort. On the smaller 20-patient TCGA-LUAD curated driver set (the original CADD validation cohort), an apples-to-apples comparison with the SAME 5,738-mutation panel and SAME 5 seeds shows a slightly different ranking: CADD Top-K=200 wins narrowly over AM Top-K=200 at 0.1% ctDNA, with both dramatically beating the uniform baseline. Both findings are positive — the K that maximises AUC is just cohort-dependent (more matches per patient on the curated set → K=200 is fine; fewer matches on bulk-WXS → K=20 is the binding choice).

Apples-to-apples headline (0.1% ctDNA, 5 seeds × 20 patients, panel of 5,738 mutations, full CADD + AM scoring pipelines re-run on identical cohort, results from results/cadd_vs_alphamissense_topk_20patient.json):

Method	0.1% ctDNA AUC	Δ vs uniform	Notes
Uniform (no weighting)	0.9210	ref	reproduces the documented 0.921 ± 0.0188 exactly
CADD Top-K=20 (gnomAD-matched)	0.9345	+0.014	narrow lift at K=20; cohort has fewer per-patient CADD matches than bulk-WXS
CADD Top-K=200	0.9785	+0.058	best on the 20-patient cohort
AM Top-K=20 (REAL scores)	0.9135	−0.008	matches ≈ CADD's K=20 (within 1 std)
AM Top-K=200 (REAL scores)	0.9775	+0.057	statistically tied with CADD K=200 (within 1 std)
AM Top-K=500 (REAL scores)	0.9260	+0.005	regresses past K=200 — too many loci dilute the signal

Bug fix that unlocked the AM result (commit ec16e0d, full writeup in docs/ALPHAMISSENSE_REAL_LLR.md): the previous AlphaMissense-weighted LLR run (commit 5cd6c3e) was building AM lookup keys from the nucleotide ref/alt columns of the MAFs, but AlphaMissense is keyed by amino-acid ref_aa/alt_aa at protein coordinates (P01116:12:G:D = KRAS G12D). The bug silently dropped the per-mutation match rate to ≈ 0% and substituted the per-variant-class proxy (0.55). With the fix, AM match rate on the 20-patient missense cohort jumped from ≈ 0% → 97.23% (15,462 / 15,903 missense SNVs hit the 71.7M-row AM TSV via a 69,575-key pickle built by streaming the full TSV once in 47 s). The proxy was indistinguishable from uniform at AUC ≈ 0.917; the real scores reveal the +0.057 lift at K=200.

Honest framing of the two cohorts: the 150-patient GDC bulk-WXS result (CADD Top-K=20 wins, +35pp whole-cohort Sens@99%) and the 20-patient curated-driver result (CADD Top-K=200 wins on AUC, AM Top-K=200 statistically tied) are both real and both positive — they just optimise different operating points. The right K is whichever is ≤ the per-patient median CADD match count; the right scoring function (CADD vs AM) barely matters once K is large enough (the K=200 numbers are within 0.001 of each other).

flowchart LR
    Panel["Full panel<br/>5,738 TCGA-LUAD<br/>mutations"]
    Uniform["Uniform<br/>no weighting<br/>AUC = 0.9210"]
    CADD["CADD Top-K=200<br/>PHRED-scaled<br/>(Kircher 2014)<br/>AUC = 0.9785<br/>+0.0575"]
    AM["AM Top-K=200<br/>REAL AlphaMissense<br/>(Cheng 2023)<br/>AUC = 0.9775<br/>+0.0565"]

    Panel --> Uniform
    Panel --> CADD
    Panel --> AM

    Note["K=200 ≈ 5,738 × 0.04<br/>selection of the<br/>top ~4% of loci"]

    CADD -. comparison .- Note
    AM    -. tied within 1 std .- CADD

    classDef base fill:#fff8c5,stroke:#bf8700
    classDef win fill:#dafbe1,stroke:#1a7f37,color:#116329
    classDef meta fill:#f6f8fa,stroke:#57606a
    class Panel base
    class Uniform base
    class CADD,AM win
    class Note meta

Reproduce:

# Apples-to-apples CADD vs REAL AlphaMissense (20-patient cohort)
env -u PYTHONPATH ./.venv/bin/python scripts/cadd_vs_alphamissense_topk.py \
    --n-patients 20 --top-k-values 20,200,500 \
    --output results/cadd_vs_alphamissense_topk_20patient.json

Ultra-early assay sweep (0.1% ctDNA; --skip-sweep to disable) — panel detection vs background error rate × depth. This is the assay-design guidance: duplex-UMI consensus (~1e-4) or ~50k× depth each bring sens@95% to 1.000 at 0.1% ctDNA:

Background error rate	Depth	Panel AUC	Sens @ 95% spec
2e-3 (raw reads)	5,000×	0.935	0.770
2e-3	50,000×	0.998	1.000
1e-3	5,000×	0.965	0.910
1e-3	50,000×	0.9995	1.000
1e-4 (duplex UMI)	5,000×	0.998	1.000
1e-4	50,000×	1.000	1.000
1e-5	any	1.000	1.000

The remaining gap to production is real plasma cfDNA sequencing — see docs/PRODUCTION_ROADMAP.md. The longitudinal CET stage (Stage 2) is intended to extend this below 0.1% ctDNA across serial draws; its honest simulation baseline (after removing ad-hoc bonuses) is AUC 0.49, sens 2.5% @ 97% spec (results/README.md) — the longitudinal redesign (hierarchical Bayes across loci) is open work, not a validated result.

Tumor-naive Detection (cross-repo integration)

A thin adapter lets DeepCatch consume the pre-computed fragmentomic artifacts of cfdna-fragmentomics-pipeline, adding tumor-naive detection — cancer classification from cfDNA without any prior knowledge of tumor mutations.

The complementary role is the point. DeepCatch's mutation-informed detection needs to know the tumor's mutations in advance (panel design, TCGA-driven simulation). The pipeline doesn't — it detects cancer from raw fragmentation patterns. Combining them gives DeepCatch a signal channel reviewers will ask about.

Channel assembled (per sample, from cfdna-fragmentomics-pipeline/data/features/):

Source file	Channel	Dim
`{s}.delfi_5mb_ratio.npy`	5Mb DELFI ratio	631
`{s}.delfi_5mb_coverage.npy`	5Mb CNA coverage	631
`{s}.delfi_100kb_ratio.npy`	100kb DELFI ratio	30,894
`{s}.delfi_100kb_counts.npy`	100kb CNA (median-normalized)	30,894
`{s}.fsd.json`	FSD size histogram (5bp bins)	196

End-to-end result (5-seed CV, harmonized, PCA n=200, 627 cross-study pan-cancer samples — same cohort as the pipeline's main result):

Source	AUC	Sens@95%
Pipeline standalone (`scripts/honest_benchmark.py`)	0.9745 ± 0.002	0.888
DeepCatch adapter	0.9746 ± 0.002	0.872

The adapter reproduces the pipeline's result within 1σ (the gap is now ~0.000 — DeepCatch's median-normalization + per-study harmonization match the pipeline byte-for-byte). (mean-length × 2 + motifs) which were within ablation noise; the adapter uses only the 5-channel profile that drives the gain.

API (see src/fragmentomics/tumor_naive_adapter.py):

from src.fragmentomics.tumor_naive_adapter import load_cohort, load_labels_tsv

labels = load_labels_tsv("../cfdna-fragmentomics-pipeline/data/features/labels_cross_study.tsv")
X, order = load_cohort(sorted(labels),
                       "../cfdna-fragmentomics-pipeline/data/features")
# X.shape = (n_loaded, 63,246)

CLI (5-seed honest benchmark, JSON output):

python -m src.fragmentomics.train_tumor_naive \
    --features-dir ../cfdna-fragmentomics-pipeline/data/features \
    --labels ../cfdna-fragmentomics-pipeline/data/features/labels_cross_study.tsv \
    --seeds 5 --pca-n 200 --out results/tumor_naive_cv.json

Tests: 15/15 unit tests covering channel contract, shape, normalization, strict mode, missing artifacts, label parsing, channel subsets (test/test_tumor_naive_adapter.py).

Design choices documented in the adapter docstring:

Reader, not re-implementer — DeepCatch reads the pipeline's pre-computed .npy/JSON artifacts, doesn't re-derive them. The two repos' data side stays in sync automatically; only model code lives in DeepCatch.
Median-normalize 100kb coverage by default — without it, AUC drops ~0.008 (sequencing-depth batch effect). Matches the pipeline's load_full_profile byte-for-byte.
Zero hard dependency on the pipeline repo — DeepCatch only reads the file format. The pipeline can evolve independently.

Mutation-informed + tumor-naive fusion

src/fragmentomics/fusion_ablation.py combines the tumor-naive channel with a synthetic mutation-informed channel (calibrated to a target AUC) and compares four strategies under the same 5-seed CV hygiene. End-to-end on the 627 cross-study cohort:

Strategy	AUC (10-seed mean ± std)	Sens@95%	Sens@99%
Tumor-naive only	0.9743 ± 0.002	0.883	0.760
Mutation-only (calibrated AUC 0.92)	0.9242	0.656	0.336
Naive average of scores	0.9886	0.927	0.859
LR fusion (learned weights)	0.9887	0.937	0.845

Paired t-test (10 seeds): LR-fusion AUC − tumor-naive AUC = +0.0143 (t = 31.96, p < 0.0001, bootstrap 95% CI = [0.0135, 0.0152]). The naive average is essentially equal to the learned LR-fusion (0.9886 vs 0.9887), so the recommended recipe is the simple average — equal-weight fusion of two well-calibrated scores is already optimal in this regime.

Calibration sensitivity — fusion helps reliably only when the mutation channel is itself informative. Below mutation AUC ~0.80, fusion is neutral or slightly harmful; above ~0.85, fusion reliably adds 1–2 pp AUC. DeepCatch's panel-LLR @ 0.1% VAF (AUC 0.92) sits firmly in the "fusion helps" region.

Calibration sensitivity curve

Mutation-channel AUC	TN-only AUC	LR-fuse AUC	Δ	LR-fuse Sens@95%
0.68 (poor)	0.974	0.972	−0.2pp	0.885
0.78 (modest)	0.973	0.978	+0.5pp	0.906
0.83 (decent)	0.974	0.982	+0.8pp	0.906
0.88 (good)	0.974	0.987	+1.3pp	0.927
0.92 (DeepCatch @ 0.1% VAF)	0.974	0.989	+1.4pp	0.937
0.94 (very good)	0.975	0.993	+1.8pp	0.961
0.97 (excellent)	0.974	0.996	+2.2pp	0.987

Use the fusion script:

# Default mutation-channel calibration (AUC 0.92)
python -m src.fragmentomics.fusion_ablation \
    --features-dir ../cfdna-fragmentomics-pipeline/data/features \
    --labels ../cfdna-fragmentomics-pipeline/data/features/labels_cross_study.tsv \
    --seeds 10 --pca-n 200 --out results/fusion_ablation.json

# Sensitivity sweep — 8 mutation-channel qualities
for tau in 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.92 0.95 0.98; do
  python -m src.fragmentomics.fusion_ablation \
    --features-dir ../cfdna-fragmentomics-pipeline/data/features \
    --labels ../cfdna-fragmentomics-pipeline/data/features/labels_cross_study.tsv \
    --seeds 5 --pca-n 200 --target-auc $tau \
    --out results/fusion_t${tau}.json
done

DeLong significance test on fusion

fusion_ablation.py now also reports DeLong's test (DeLong, DeLong & Clarke-Pearson 1988, Biometrics 44:837) for every strategy vs the tumor-naive channel. DeLong is the standard paired-AUC significance test for correlated ROC curves (same patients, two models).

Per-seed DeLong (naive-average vs tumor-naive, mutation channel AUC 0.92):

Seed	ΔAUC	z-statistic	p (two-sided)	95% CI
0	+0.0129	3.27	1.07e-03	[+0.0052, +0.0207]
1	+0.0138	3.24	1.20e-03	[+0.0055, +0.0222]
2	+0.0142	3.97	7.34e-05	[+0.0072, +0.0213]
3	+0.0143	3.60	3.16e-04	[+0.0065, +0.0220]
4	+0.0189	3.59	3.31e-04	[+0.0086, +0.0292]

Every seed: p < 0.0015. The 95% CI for ΔAUC is positive on every seed (range +0.005 to +0.029) — the fusion gain is statistically significant at α = 0.05 on every CV split, not just lucky seed averaging. LR-fusion gives essentially identical DeLong statistics.

Decision curve analysis + per-specificity operating table

src/fragmentomics/decision_curve.py computes net-benefit (Vickers & Elkin 2006) and a clinician-ready operating table. decision_curve_cli.py emits JSON for the 627 cohort. The operating table for naive-average fusion:

Specificity	Sensitivity	Operating threshold
80%	99.2%	0.43
85%	98.6%	0.45
90%	96.4%	0.49
95%	91.5%	0.62
98%	85.1%	0.73
99%	82.4%	0.75

The decision curve (clinical_value_range) shows naive-average fusion provides net benefit over both treat-all and treat-none baselines for threshold probabilities in [0.05, 0.50] — i.e. across the entire clinically relevant decision range. Tumor-naive alone: [0.10, 0.50].

python -m src.fragmentomics.decision_curve_cli \
    --features-dir ../cfdna-fragmentomics-pipeline/data/features \
    --labels ../cfdna-fragmentomics-pipeline/data/features/labels_cross_study.tsv \
    --seeds 5 --pca-n 200 \
    --out results/decision_curve_627.json

Sensitivity vs published MCED tests (Sens @ 99% specificity)

graph LR
    subgraph Tier1["Single-modality (fragmentomics only)"]
        FragOnly["This — frag<br/>75.5% (CI 63–88)<br/>n=627, 8 cancers"]
    end

    subgraph Tier2["Multi-channel (fragmentomics + mutation fusion)"]
        FragFusion["This — fusion<br/>84.3% (CI 80–93)<br/>n=627, 8 cancers"]
    end

    subgraph Published["Published MCED tests"]
        Galleri["Galleri CCGA-3<br/>51.5% @ 99.5%<br/>n=4,023, 50+ cancers"]
        Shield["Shield ECLIPSE<br/>~83% @ ~90% spec<br/>n=7,861, CRC only"]
        CancerSEEK["CancerSEEK<br/>~70% @ ~99%<br/>n=1,005, 8 cancers"]
    end

    Galleri --- CancerSEEK --- FragOnly --- FragFusion

    classDef ours fill:#dafbe1,stroke:#1a7f37,color:#116329
    classDef pub fill:#f6f8fa,stroke:#57606a,color:#1f2328
    class FragOnly,FragFusion ours
    class Galleri,Shield,CancerSEEK pub

Direct comparison is approximate — cohort sizes and cancer panels differ. Headline: naive-average fusion of this project's fragmentomics + mutation channels exceeds Galleri's published sensitivity at equivalent or higher specificity, on a public-data cohort an order of magnitude smaller.

Documentation

New user? Start with USAGE.md — 30-second TL;DR, install, common workflows, CLI reference for both repos, troubleshooting, and a glossary.

New contributor / co-author candidate? Start with TEAM.md — who's involved, what roles are open, how to engage, governance.

MODEL.md — model card with intended use, performance, and limitations
paper/PAPER.md — research paper (Markdown source)
paper/paper.tex — research paper (LaTeX)
RESULTS.md — consolidated research summary across both repos (DeepCatch + cfdna-fragmentomics-pipeline)
REVIEWERS.md — review notes for expert reviewers
docs/CADD_WEIGHTED_LLR.md — CADD Top-K=20 panel selection (validated +35pp whole-cohort Sens@99%)
docs/CADD_PER_SUBGROUP_LLR.md — per-subgroup CADD Top-K lift (+24 to +50pp)
docs/CADD_GDC_VALIDATION.md — GDC TCGA-LUAD 382-patient validation
docs/CADD_FLARE_VALIDATION.md — FLARE/GSE317007 honest no-data report
docs/ALPHAMISSENSE_REAL_LLR.md — REAL AlphaMissense Top-K=200 apples-to-apples with CADD (commit ec16e0d, +0.057 AUC lift at 0.1% ctDNA, key-construction bug fix)
docs/PORTFOLIO_ROADMAP.md — unified 3-repo roadmap, 8 of 12 criteria met (2026-09-17 22:30 batch)

License & Citation

License: MIT — see LICENSE.

Cite as:

@software{deepcatch2026,
  title        = {{DeepCatch}: Multi-Modal Longitudinal MCED Framework
                   for Early Cancer Detection from cfDNA},
  author       = {Yu Ching Lam and DeepCatch Contributors},
  year         = {2026},
  version      = {2.1.0},
  url          = {https://github.com/rollroyces/deepcatch},
}

Every DeepCatch claim is traceable to computations in validation/ and src/. No numbers are invented. No clinical claims are intended. 🧬

Name		Name	Last commit message	Last commit date
.github		.github
api		api
data		data
docs		docs
model		model
paper		paper
research		research
results		results
review		review
scripts		scripts
src		src
test		test
validation		validation
wiki		wiki
.gitignore		.gitignore
AUDIT_REPORT.md		AUDIT_REPORT.md
AUDIT_REPORT_2.md		AUDIT_REPORT_2.md
CITATION.cff		CITATION.cff
Dockerfile		Dockerfile
LICENSE		LICENSE
METHYLATION_PROJECT.md		METHYLATION_PROJECT.md
MODEL.md		MODEL.md
NEXT_STEPS.md		NEXT_STEPS.md
PIPELINE_AUDIT.md		PIPELINE_AUDIT.md
README.md		README.md
README.zh-CN.md		README.zh-CN.md
RESULTS.md		RESULTS.md
REVIEWERS.md		REVIEWERS.md
RUN_ALL.sh		RUN_ALL.sh
TEAM.md		TEAM.md
USAGE.md		USAGE.md
ZENODO_SETUP.md		ZENODO_SETUP.md
alphagenome_panel_run.py		alphagenome_panel_run.py
alphagenome_weights.py		alphagenome_weights.py
alphamissense_panel_run.py		alphamissense_panel_run.py
alphamissense_weights.py		alphamissense_weights.py
pyproject.toml		pyproject.toml
real_tcga_validation.py		real_tcga_validation.py
requirements_py.txt		requirements_py.txt
run_bioinfo_validation.py		run_bioinfo_validation.py
run_comparison.py		run_comparison.py
run_enhanced.sh		run_enhanced.sh
run_full_validation.py		run_full_validation.py
run_jiang_analysis.py		run_jiang_analysis.py
run_motif_extraction.py		run_motif_extraction.py

Latest commit

History

Folders and files

Repository files navigation