bioRxivBioinformaticsPreprint
On the Accuracy of Internal Circadian Time Prediction Methods from a Single Sample
Abstract
Biological processes ranging from gene expression to sleep-wake cycles display oscillations with an approximately 24-hour period, or circadian rhythms. A challenge in analyzing circadian rhythms is that these rhythms vary across individuals and are based on an individuals internal circadian time (ICT), which is uniquely offset relative to the 24-hour day-night cycle time (zeitgeber time, or ZT). Many model-based methods have been proposed to predict ICT given an individuals biomarker measurements. However, the prediction accuracy of these methods is rarely validated using known ICT. In this article, we evaluate this accuracy for three state-of-the-art model-based methods: COFE, partial least squares regression, and TimeSignature. We find that if a single sample is obtained from each individual and a model is fit using only biomarker measurements as predictors, then ZT predicts ICT more accurately than any of the model-based ICT predictions. However, we also find that TimeSignature can outperform ZT when the model incorporates sine and cosine transforms of sample collection ZT as two additional predictors. These findings are based on analysis of three circadian transcriptome datasets as well as simulation studies, and highlight the importance of accounting for individual-level differences in biomarker oscillations to improve ICT prediction.
- organism: human
- assay: bulk RNA-seq
- research focus: benchmarking
- research focus: differential expression
- approach: statistical model
- approach: simulation
- Citations
- 0
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Monitoring the circadian clock in human blood using personalized machine learning
Jacob J Hughey·bioRxiv·Aug 3, 2016
- Performance of blood-based biomarkers for human circadian pacemaker phase: Training sets matter as much as feature selection methods
Carla S. Möller‐Levet, Simon N Archer, Derk‐Jan Dijk·Journal of Biological RhythmsPeer-reviewed·Aug 31, 2025
- Initial Condition Decision to Ensure Reliable Circadian Phase Estimation with Shorter-Term Wearable Data
Dongju Lim, J.H. Kim, … Jae Kyoung Kim·Journal of Biological RhythmsPeer-reviewed·Apr 2, 2026
- Fast or slow? Clock readout sets internal periods
S. E. Palmer, C. M. Holmes·bioRxiv·Mar 17, 2023
- A single-sample circadian biomarker that performs across populations and platforms
Gang Wu, Marc D. Ruben, … John B. Hogenesch·Genome MedicinePeer-reviewed·Aug 21, 2020
- Population-scale molecular reconstruction of human circadian phase from blood biomarkers
Clara Albiñana, Rebecca Claire Richmond, … Naomi R. Wray·medRxiv·Jul 13, 2026