MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Diversitree: comparative phylogenetic analyses of diversification in R

2012· article· en· W1482160415 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Richard G. FitzJohn

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in Ecology and Evolution · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEvolution and Paleontology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsGenetic algorithmExtinction (optical mineralogy)R packagePhylogenetic treeTraitMacroevolutionBiologyEvolutionary biologyStatisticsComputer scienceMathematicsGeneticsPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary 1. The R package ‘diversitree’ contains a number of classical and contemporary comparative phylogenetic methods. Key included methods are BiSSE (binary state speciation and extinction), MuSSE (a multistate extension of BiSSE), and QuaSSE (quantitative state speciation and extinction). Diversitree also includes methods for analysing trait evolution and estimating speciation/extinction rates independently. 2. In this note, I describe the features and demonstrate use of the package, using a new method, MuSSE (multistate speciation and extinction), to examine the joint effects of two traits on speciation. 3. Using simulations, I found that MuSSE could reliably detect that a binary trait that affected speciation rates when simultaneously accounting for additional thats that had no effect on speciation rates. 4. Diversitree is an open source and available on the Comprehensive R Archive Network ( cran ). A tutorial and worked examples can be downloaded from http://www.zoology.ubc.ca/prog/diversitree .

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1140.040

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.154
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations990
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in Ecology and EvolutionSame topicEvolution and Paleontology StudiesFrench-language works237,207