Fast Statistical Tests for Detecting Heterotachy in Protein Evolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The w statistic introduced by Lockhart et al. (1998. A covariotide model explains apparent phylogenetic structure of oxygenic photosynthetic lineages. Mol Biol Evol. 15:1183-1188) is a simple and easily calculated statistic intended to detect heterotachy by comparing amino acid substitution patterns between two monophyletic groups of protein sequences. It is defined as the difference between the fraction of varied sites in both groups and the fraction of varied sites in each group. The w test has been used to distinguish a covarion process from equal rates and rates variation across sites processes. Using simulation we show that the w test is effective for small data sets and for data sets that have low substitution rates in the groups but can have difficulties when these conditions are not met. Using site entropy as a measure of variability of a sequence site, we modify the w statistic to a w' statistic by assigning as varied in one group those sites that are actually varied in both groups but have a large entropy difference. We show that the w' test has more power to detect two kinds of heterotachy processes (covarion and bivariate rate shifts) in large and variable data. We also show that a test of Pearson's correlation of the site entropies between two monophyletic groups can be used to detect heterotachy and has more power than the w' test. Furthermore, we demonstrate that there are settings where the correlation test as well as w and w' tests do not detect heterotachy signals in data simulated under a branch length mixture model. In such cases, it is sometimes possible to detect heterotachy through subselection of appropriate taxa. Finally, we discuss the abilities of the three statistical tests to detect a fourth mode of heterotachy: lineage-specific changes in proportion of variable sites.
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 | 0.038 | 0.196 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".