MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963517294 · doi:10.1239/jap/1285335406

Recurrence Equations for the Probability Distribution of Sample Configurations in Exact Population Genetics Models

2010· article· en· W1963517294 on OpenAlexafffund
Sabin Lessard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Probability · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCoalescent theoryMathematicsStatisticsMutation rateMutationPopulationLimit (mathematics)Applied mathematicsSampling (signal processing)Sample size determinationMathematical analysisBiologyDemographyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recurrence equations for the number of types and the frequency of each type in a random sample drawn from a finite population undergoing discrete, nonoverlapping generations and reproducing according to the Cannings exchangeable model are deduced under the assumption of a mutation scheme with infinitely many types. The case of overlapping generations in discrete time is also considered. The equations are developed for the Wright-Fisher model and the Moran model, and extended to the case of the limit coalescent with nonrecurrent mutation as the population size goes to ∞ and the mutation rate to 0. Computations of the total variation distance for the distribution of the number of types in the sample suggest that the exact Moran model provides a better approximation for the sampling formula under the exact Wright-Fisher model than the Ewens sampling formula in the limit of the Kingman coalescent with nonrecurrent mutation. On the other hand, this model seems to provide a good approximation for a Λ-coalescent with nonrecurrent mutation as long as the probability of multiple mergers and the mutation rate are small enough.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations8
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied ProbabilitySame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207