MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098878547 · doi:10.1093/molbev/msp248

A Dirichlet Process Covarion Mixture Model and Its Assessments Using Posterior Predictive Discrepancy Tests

2009· article· en· W2098878547 on OpenAlexafffund
Yan Zhou, Henner Brinkmann, Nicolas Rodrigue, Nicolas Lartillot, Hervé Philippe

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology and Evolution · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsGénome QuébecGenome Canada
KeywordsDirichlet processDirichlet distributionBiologyProbabilistic logicPhylogenetic treeSequence (biology)Biological systemBayesian probabilityStatistical physicsMathematicsEvolutionary biologyStatisticsGeneticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heterotachy, the variation of substitution rate at a site across time, is a prevalent phenomenon in nucleotide and amino acid alignments, which may mislead probabilistic-based phylogenetic inferences. The covarion model is a special case of heterotachy, in which sites change between the "ON" state (allowing substitutions according to any particular model of sequence evolution) and the "OFF" state (prohibiting substitutions). In current implementations, the switch rates between ON and OFF states are homogeneous across sites, a hypothesis that has never been tested. In this study, we developed an infinite mixture model, called the covarion mixture (CM) model, which allows the covarion parameters to vary across sites, controlled by a Dirichlet process prior. Moreover, we combine the CM model with other approaches. We use a second independent Dirichlet process that models the heterogeneities of amino acid equilibrium frequencies across sites, known as the CAT model, and general rate-across-site heterogeneity is modeled by a gamma distribution. The application of the CM model to several large alignments demonstrates that the covarion parameters are significantly heterogeneous across sites. We describe posterior predictive discrepancy tests and use these to demonstrate the importance of these different elements of the models.

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)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.197
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.197
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations35
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology and EvolutionSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207