MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010972289 · doi:10.1063/1.2962223

Evolution of complex dynamics

2008· article· en· W2010972289 on OpenAlexafffund
Roy Wilds, Stuart Kauffman, Leon Glass

Bibliographic record

VenueChaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Alberta
KeywordsNeutral networkFitness landscapeEvolutionary dynamicsNeutral theory of molecular evolutionRate of evolutionMutationBiological evolutionMutation rateStatistical physicsHill climbingEvolutionary algorithmNeutral mutationComputer scienceEvolutionary biologyMathematicsArtificial neural networkBiologyArtificial intelligencePhysicsGeneticsPhylogenetic treePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the evolution of complex dynamics in a model of a genetic regulatory network. The fitness is associated with the topological entropy in a class of piecewise linear equations, and the mutations are associated with changes in the logical structure of the network. We compare hill climbing evolution, in which only mutations that increase the fitness are allowed, with neutral evolution, in which mutations that leave the fitness unchanged are allowed. The simple structure of the fitness landscape enables us to estimate analytically the rates of hill climbing and neutral evolution. In this model, allowing neutral mutations accelerates the rate of evolutionary advancement for low mutation frequencies. These results are applicable to evolution in natural and technological systems.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.301 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear ScienceSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207