MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090656257 · doi:10.1111/1541-0420.00045

A Test of Linkage for Complex Discrete and Continuous Traits in Nuclear Families

2003· article· en· W2090656257 on OpenAlexafffund
David Tritchler, Ying Liu, Shafagh Fallah

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsKurtosisNuclear familyInheritance (genetic algorithm)CovariateExponential familyLinkage (software)TraitMajor geneMathematicsLocus (genetics)PolygeneStatisticsGeneticsQuantitative trait locusBiologyComputer scienceGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a score test for genetic linkage in nuclear families which applies to any trait having a distribution belonging to the exponential family, which includes binary and normal distributions, and distributions which are skewed or have nonnormal kurtosis. The specific distribution need not be specified and the method applies to sibships of arbitrary size. Tests of complex genetic effects are given, including unspecified mode of inheritance or additive, dominant, overdominant, and recessive modes of inheritance, covariates, multiple-locus models, including gene-gene interactions, and gene-environment interactions. The relation of our method to the Haseman-Elston methods is studied theoretically and by simulation.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.097
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.097
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations15
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiometricsSame topicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and AnimalsFrench-language works237,207