Bibliographic record
Abstract
Methods for Bayesian inference of phylogeny using DNA sequences based on Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) techniques allow the incorporation of arbitrarily complex models of the DNA substitution process, and other aspects of evolution. This has increased the realism of models, potentially improving the accuracy of the methods, and is largely responsible for their recent popularity. Another consequence of the increased complexity of models in Bayesian phylogenetics is that these models have, in several cases, become overparameterized. In such cases, some parameters of the model are not identifiable; different combinations of nonidentifiable parameters lead to the same likelihood, making it impossible to decide among the potential parameter values based on the data. Overparameterized models can also slow the rate of convergence of MCMC algorithms due to large negative correlations among parameters in the posterior probability distribution. Functions of parameters can sometimes be found, in overparameterized models, that are identifiable, and inferences based on these functions are legitimate. Examples are presented of overparameterized models that have been proposed in the context of several Bayesian methods for inferring the relative ages of nodes in a phylogeny when the substitution rate evolves over time.
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 | 0.026 | 0.184 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".