MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1914795716 · doi:10.1093/genetics/156.4.2119

A Method for Estimating the Intensity of Overdominant Selection From the Distribution of Allele Frequencies

2000· article· en· W1914795716 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Montgomery Slatkin, Christina A. Muirhead

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicT-cell and B-cell Immunology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of General Medical Sciences
KeywordsBiologyAlleleGeneticsAllele frequencyMajor histocompatibility complexSelection (genetic algorithm)Human leukocyte antigenPopulationPopulation geneticsGeneAntigen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method is proposed for estimating the intensity of overdominant selection scaled by the effective population size, S = 2Ns, from allele frequencies. The method is based on the assumption that, with strong overdominant selection, allele frequencies are nearly at their deterministic equilibrium values and that, to a first approximation, deviations depend only on S. Simulations verify that reasonably accurate estimates of S can be obtained for realistic sample sizes. The method is applied to data from several loci in the major histocompatibility complex (Mhc) in numerous human populations. For alleles distinguished by both serological typing and the sequence of the peptide-binding region, our estimates of S are comparable to those obtained by analysis of DNA sequences in showing that selection is strongest on HLA-B and weaker on HLA-A, HLA-DRB1, and HLA-DQA1. The intensity of selection on HLA-B varied considerably among populations. Two populations, Native American and Inuit, showed an excess rather than a deficiency in homozygosity. Comparable estimates of S were obtained for alleles at Mhc class II loci distinguished by serological reactions (serotyping) and by differences in the amino acid sequences of the peptide-binding region (molecular typing). A comparison of two types of data for DQA1 and DRB1 showed that serotyping led to generally lower estimates of S.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.193

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations24
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeneticsSame topicT-cell and B-cell ImmunologyFrench-language works237,207