MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982972381 · doi:10.1111/1755-0998.12217

A pairwise relatedness estimator for polyploids

2013· article· en· W1982972381 on OpenAlexaff
Kang Huang, Kermit Ritland, Songtao Guo, Milena R. Shattuck, Baoguo Li

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Ecology Resources · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBiologyEstimatorPairwise comparisonPloidyStatisticsAmbiguityPolyploidGeneticsMathematicsGeneComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studies in genetics and ecology often require estimates of relatedness coefficients based on genetic marker data. Many diploid estimators have been developed using either method-of-moments or maximum-likelihood estimates. However, there are no relatedness estimators for polyploids. The development of a moment estimator for polyploids with polysomic inheritance, which simultaneously incorporates the two-gene relatedness coefficient and various 'higher-order' coefficients, is described here. The performance of the estimator is compared to other estimators under a variety of conditions. When using a small number of loci, the estimator is biased because of an increase in ill-conditioned matrices. However, the estimator becomes asymptotically unbiased with large numbers of loci. The ambiguity of polyploid heterozygotes (when balanced heterozygotes cannot be distinguished from unbalanced heterozygotes) is also considered; as with low numbers of loci, genotype ambiguity leads to bias. A software, PolyRelatedness, implementing this method and supporting a maximum ploidy of 8 is provided.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.208 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations40
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Ecology ResourcesSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207