MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103516605 · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12034

<scp>SURFACE</scp>: detecting convergent evolution from comparative data by fitting Ornstein‐Uhlenbeck models with stepwise Akaike Information Criterion

2013· article· en· W2103516605 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Travis Ingram, D. Luke Mahler

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in Ecology and Evolution · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEvolution and Paleontology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHarvard University
KeywordsAkaike information criterionConvergent evolutionConvergence (economics)Phylogenetic treeMathematicsSurface (topology)Bayesian information criterionTree (set theory)StatisticsCladeR packageSelection (genetic algorithm)Evolutionary biologyApplied mathematicsBiologyStatistical physicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceCombinatoricsGeneGeneticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary We present a method, ‘ SURFACE ’, that uses the Ornstein‐Uhlenbeck stabilizing selection model to identify cases of convergent evolution using only continuous phenotypic characters and a phylogenetic tree. SURFACE uses stepwise Akaike Information Criterion first to locate regime shifts on a tree, then to identify whether shifts are towards convergent regimes. Simulations can be used to test the hypothesis that a clade contains more convergence than expected by chance. We demonstrate the method with an application to Hawaiian Tetragnatha spiders, and present numerical simulations showing that the method has desirable statistical properties given data for multiple traits. The r package surface is available as open source software from the Comprehensive R Archive Network.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations328
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in Ecology and EvolutionSame topicEvolution and Paleontology StudiesFrench-language works237,207