MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035535371 · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12233

Rphylip: an<scp>R</scp>interface for<scp>PHYLIP</scp>

2014· article· en· W2035535371 on OpenAlexaff
Liam J. Revell, Scott Chamberlain

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in Ecology and Evolution · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEvolution and Paleontology Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhylogenetic treeInterface (matter)Software packageSoftwareBiologyPhylogeneticsR packageWorkflowDryopteridaceaeComputer scienceDatabaseProgramming languageEcologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The phylogeny methods software package PHYLIP has long been among the most widely used packages for phylogeny inference and phylogenetic comparative biology. Numerous methods available in PHYLIP , including several new phylogenetic comparative analyses of considerable importance, are not implemented in any other software. Over the past decade, the popularity of the R statistical computing environment for many different types of phylogenetic analyses has soared, particularly in phylogenetic comparative biology. There are now numerous packages and methods developed for the R environment. In this article, we present Rphylip, a new R interface for the PHYLIP package. Functions of Rphylip interface seamlessly with all of the major analysis functions of the PHYLIP package. This new interface will enable the much easier use of PHYLIP programs in an integrated R workflow. In this study, we describe our motivation for developing Rphylip and present an illustration of how functions in the Rphylip package can be used for phylogenetic analysis in R.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: Software
Teacher disagreement score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0070.005
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2040.192

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations67
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in Ecology and EvolutionSame topicEvolution and Paleontology StudiesFrench-language works237,207