MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117910122 · doi:10.1093/molbev/msl065

Test a Clade in Phylogenetic Trees

2006· article· en· W2117910122 on OpenAlexafffund
Xiaofei Shi, Hong Gu, Chris Field

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology and Evolution · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersGenome Atlantic
KeywordsCladeBiologyPhylogenetic treeTree (set theory)False discovery rateType I and type II errorsMultiple comparisons problemStatisticsTaxonWord error rateEvolutionary biologyMathematicsComputer scienceGeneticsArtificial intelligenceEcologyGeneCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We develop a new method for testing a portion of a tree (called a clade) based on multiple tests of many 4-taxon trees in this paper. This is particularly useful when the phylogenetic tree constructed by other methods have a clade that is difficult to explain from a biological point of view. The statement about the test of the clade can be made through the multiple P values from these individual tests. By controlling the familywise error rate or the false discovery rate (FDR), 4 different tree test methods are evaluated through simulation methods. It shows that the combination of the approximately unbiased (AU) test and the FDR-controlling procedure provides strong power along with reasonable type I error rate and less heavy computation.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.087
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.087
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology and EvolutionSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207