MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2091207028 · doi:10.3168/jds.2010-3863

Short communication: Quantifying bias in a single-trait international model ignoring covariances from multiple-trait national models

2011· article· en· W2091207028 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohammad Ali Nilforooshan, W.F. Fikse, B. Berglund, Jette Jakobsen, H. Jorjani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSwedish Institute
KeywordsTraitEconometricsStatisticsBiologyComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current method in use for international genetic evaluations, called single-trait multiple across-country evaluation (ST-MACE), does not consider residual covariances among traits, making possible only the inclusion of one trait per country in an analysis. The aim of this study was to quantify the effect of bias resulting from treating traits from the same country as nationally independent in an international genetic evaluation. Data from the September 2007 Interbull test evaluation for Holstein female fertility traits were used. Data included were 1 trait from Belgium, Switzerland, Spain, and the United States of America, and 2 traits from Canada, Germany-Austria, and Denmark-Finland-Sweden. The biased results were obtained from a 10-variate ST-MACE analysis including all country traits. The unbiased results were obtained from 8 different 7-variate ST-MACE analyses, each including only 1 trait per country. Average absolute bias in the genetic correlations among 2-trait countries (0.11) was higher than for between 1-trait countries and 2-trait countries (0.07) and for among 1-trait countries (0.03). The results of the biased and the unbiased analyses were different, not only due to bias, but also because of different number of traits involved in the analyses. Differences were considerable (on average, 0.08 to 6.91) for reliabilities, which were higher for traits with lower heritability. Average differences were minor (-0.04 to 0.03 standard deviations) for predicted genetic merits. However, for the top 100 bulls in each country trait, these differences were important (on average, -0.26 to 0.11 standard deviation of predicted genetic merit), which caused considerable changes in bull rankings. The results of this study showed that the effect of bias, caused by ignoring covariances from multiple-trait national models in an ST-MACE analysis, is of such a magnitude that necessitates the use of another method such as multiple-trait multiple across-country evaluation.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.081
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.081
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.188
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.134 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy Science→Same topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock→French-language works237,207→