Bibliographic record
Abstract
In finite populations subject to selection, genetic drift generates negative linkage disequilibrium, on average, even if selection acts independently (i.e., multiplicatively) upon all loci. Negative disequilibrium reduces the variance in fitness and hence, by Fisher's (1930) fundamental theorem, slows the rate of increase in mean fitness. Modifiers that increase recombination eliminate the negative disequilibria that impede selection and consequently increase in frequency by "hitchhiking." Thus, stochastic fluctuations in linkage disequilibrium in finite populations favor the evolution of increased rates of recombination, even in the absence of epistatic interactions among loci and even when disequilibrium is initially absent. The method developed within this article allows us to quantify the strength of selection acting on a modifier allele that increases recombination in a finite population. The analysis indicates that stochastically generated linkage disequilibria do select for increased recombination, a result that is confirmed by Monte Carlo simulations. Selection for a modifier that increases recombination is highest when linkage among loci is tight, when beneficial alleles rise from low to high frequency, and when the population size is small.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".