MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Distance‐based population classification software using mean‐field annealing

2010· article· en· W2098269566 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Ecology Resources · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologySoftwarePopulationStatisticsEvolutionary biologyDemographyComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a distance-based clustering method using a proximity matrix of genetic distances to partition populations into genetically similar groupings. The optimization heuristic mean-field annealing (MFA) was used to find locally optimal solutions where exhaustive search was not possible. To illustrate this method, we analysed both simulated and real data sets. Simulated data indicated that MFA successfully differentiated population groups, even with small F(ST) values, as long as there was separation of within and between group distances. Reanalysis of microsatellite data from various human populations using mean-fields found similar ethnic groups corresponding to major geographic regions reported by Rosenberg et al. (2002) who used the model-based computer program Structure. However, with MFA, the Kalash population was found to group with other Central/South Asian populations instead of being the only member of its own genetic cluster. Europe/Middle East populations formed a separate group from Central/South Asian populations instead of being a single group in the Structure analysis. The MFA analysis determined the greatest genetic distances (largest mean intracluster distance) occurred in native American populations, identifying three groups instead of only one found with Structure. For conservation purposes, it is not only important to identify genetically similar groupings but also to determine the relative level of genetic differentiation captured within these groups. To illustrate this, we compare two separate MFA analyses of Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) populations from British Columbia, Canada. The software called PORGS-MFA used in this article can be downloaded from http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/facilities-installations/pbs-sbp/mgl-lgm/apps/porgs/index-eng.htm.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score0.562

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.267 · 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