Coordinated Conditional Simulation with SLINK and SUP of Many Markers Linked or Associated to a Trait in Large Pedigrees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Simulation of genotypes in pedigrees is an important tool to evaluate the power of a linkage or an association study and to assess the empirical significance of results. SLINK is a widely-used package for pedigree simulations, but its implementation has not previously been described in a published paper. SLINK was initially derived from the LINKAGE programs. Over the 20 years since its release, SLINK has been modified to incorporate faster algorithms, notably from the linkage analysis package FASTLINK, also derived from LINKAGE. While SLINK can simulate genotypes on pedigrees of high complexity, one limitation of SLINK, as with most methods based on peeling algorithms to evaluate pedigree likelihoods, is the small number of linked markers that can be generated. The software package SUP includes an elegant wrapper for SLINK that circumvents the limitation on number of markers by using descent markers generated by SLINK to simulate a much larger number of markers on the same chromosome, linked and possibly associated with a trait locus. We have released new coordinated versions of SLINK (3.0; available from http://watson.hgen.pitt.edu) and SUP (v090804; available from http://mlemire.freeshell.org/software or http://watson.hgen.pitt.edu) that integrate the two software packages. Thereby, we have removed some of the previous limitations on the joint functionality of the programs, such as the number of founders in a pedigree. We review the history of SLINK and describe how SLINK and SUP are now coordinated to permit the simulation of large numbers of markers linked and possibly associated with a trait in large pedigrees.
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 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.004 |
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".