Repetitive sequences in phylogeographic inference: a reply to Saltonstall and Lambertini (2012)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In 2011, Vachon and Freeland presented the results of a study that illustrated the importance of considering mutation patterns, including the potential for homoplasy, when deciding whether to include or exclude repetitive sequences from phylogeographic inferences. Saltonstall and Lambertini (2012) criticized this study by suggesting that some of the analyses and interpretations were flawed. In this reply, we explain why we disagree with most of their criticisms and identify some inconsistencies in their analyses. Most importantly, we reiterate the need to examine underlying assumptions, particularly with respect to mutation patterns, when using molecular genetic data to untangle evolutionary relationships.
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 | 0.128 | 0.337 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.036 | 0.088 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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.
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".