Bibliographic record
Abstract
Methods presented previously to combine GEBV of young bulls and MACE solutions of ancestors were reviewed. Variances required for GMACE could be assumed equal to the variances in regular MACE, or estimated from GMACE input data. Equations to estimate variance were partitioned to explain extreme estimates that have been observed. Variance estimation was subsequently improved and constraints were applied to avoid extreme variances in GMACE applications. Subtracting the average difference between national GEBV and MACE parent average forced a null average for Mendelian Sampling estimates and removed inconsistencies among population scales. This adjustment reduced or eliminated the majority of extreme genomic variance estimates. The small number of remaining extremes were for traits with unusually low reliabilities of national GEBV. Nearly all other estimates of genetic standard deviation (SD) were within the range 0.80-1.20 times the SD used for MACE. Estimates outside this range were truncated to the edges of the range. RMSE of local GEBV predictions, based on GMACE of data that included GEBV from only foreign countries, were reduced by these constraints on genomic variance estimates. The use of robust variance estimates also reduced the bias of top young bull predictions, especially for traits with the largest biases. Relative to the use of MACE variances, GMACE with robust genomic variances gave a slightly higher but similarly low maximum bias for SCS (20% versus 18%) and for all other traits the maximum bias was reduced, from 22% to 10% for protein yield, from 46% to 16% for stature, from 61% to 44% for longevity, and from 28% to 27% for fertility.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".