Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lande's equation for predicting the response of trait means to a shift in optimal trait values is tested using a stochastic simulation model. The simulated population is finite, and each individual has a finite number of loci. Therefore, selection may cause allele frequencies and distributions to change over time. Since the equation assumes constant genetic parameters, the degree to which such allelic changes affect predictions can be examined. Predictions are based only on information available at generation zero of directional selection. The quality of the predictions depends on the nature of allelic distributions in the original population. If allelic effects are approximately normally distributed, as assumed in Lande's Gaussian approximation to the continuum-of-alleles model, the predictions are very accurate, despite small changes in the G matrix. If allelic effects have a leptokurtic distribution, as is likely in Turelli's 'house-of-cards' approximation, the equation underestimates the rate of response and correlated response, and overestimates the time required for the trait means to reach their equilibrium values. Models with biallelic loci have limits as to the amount of trait divergence possible, since only two allelic values are available at each of a finite set of loci. If the new optimal trait values lie within these limits, predictions are good, if not, singularity in the G matrix results in suboptimal equilibria, despite the presence of genetic variance for each individual trait.
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 | 0.004 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".