A method for the prediction of multitrait breeding values for use in stochastic simulation to compare progeny‐testing schemes, with large progeny groups for proven sires
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A method of approximating estimated breeding values (EBV) from a multivariate distribution of true breeding values (TBV) and EBV is proposed for use in large-scale stochastic simulation of alternative breeding schemes with a complex breeding goal. The covariance matrix of the multivariate distributions includes the additive genetic (co)variances and approximated prediction error (co)variances at different selection stages in the life of the animal. The prediction error (co)variance matrix is set up for one animal at a time, utilizing information on the selection candidate and its offspring, the parents, as well as paternal and maternal half- sibs. The EBV are a regression on TBV taking individual uncertainty into account, but with additional 'free' variation drawn at random. With the current information included in the calculation of the prediction error variance of a selection candidate, it is concluded that the method can be used to optimize progeny-testing schemes, where the progeny-tested sires are utilized with large progeny groups, e.g. through artificial insemination.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".