ESTIMATING NONLINEAR SELECTION GRADIENTS USING QUADRATIC REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS: DOUBLE OR NOTHING?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of regression analysis has been instrumental in allowing evolutionary biologists to estimate the strength and mode of natural selection. Although directional and correlational selection gradients are equal to their corresponding regression coefficients, quadratic regression coefficients must be doubled to estimate stabilizing/disruptive selection gradients. Based on a sample of 33 papers published in Evolution between 2002 and 2007, at least 78% of papers have not doubled quadratic regression coefficients, leading to an appreciable underestimate of the strength of stabilizing and disruptive selection. Proper treatment of quadratic regression coefficients is necessary for estimation of fitness surfaces and contour plots, canonical analysis of the gamma matrix, and modeling the evolution of populations on an adaptive landscape.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it