MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006213144 · doi:10.1139/f05-224

The Gibbs and splitmerge sampler for population mixture analysis from genetic data with incomplete baselines

2006· article· en· W2006213144 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jerome J. Pella, Michele Masuda

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMixture modelGibbs samplingStatisticsMarkov chainMathematicsPopulationMarkov chain Monte CarloMerge (version control)Bayesian probabilityComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although population mixtures often include contributions from novel populations as well as from baseline populations previously sampled, unlabeled mixture individuals can be separated to their sources from genetic data. A Gibbs and split–merge Markov chain Monte Carlo sampler is described for successively partitioning a genetic mixture sample into plausible subsets of individuals from each of the baseline and extra-baseline populations present. The subsets are selected to satisfy the Hardy–Weinberg and linkage equilibrium conditions expected for large, panmictic populations. The number of populations present can be inferred from the distribution for counts of subsets per partition drawn by the sampler. To further summarize the sampler's output, co-assignment probabilities of mixture individuals to the same subsets are computed from the partitions and are used to construct a binary tree of their relatedness. The tree graphically displays the clusters of mixture individuals together with a quantitative measure of the evidence supporting their various separate and common sources. The methodology is applied to several simulated and real data sets to illustrate its use and demonstrate the sampler's superior performance.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations98
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207