Probability of Fixation in a Heterogeneous Environment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate the probability of fixation of a new mutation arising in a metapopulation that ranges over a heterogeneous selective environment. Using simulations, we test the performance of several approximations of this probability, including a new analytical approximation based on separation of the timescales of selection and migration. We extend all approximations to multideme metapopulations with arbitrary population structure. Our simulations show that no single approximation produces accurate predictions of fixation probabilities for all cases of potential interest. At the limits of low and high migration, previously published approximations are found to be highly accurate. The new separation-of-timescales approach provides the best approximations for intermediate rates of migration among habitats, provided selection is not too intense. For nonzero migration and relatively strong selection, all approximations perform poorly. However, the probability of fixation is bounded above and below by the approximations based on low and high migration limits. Surprisingly, in our simulations with symmetric migration, heterogeneous selection in a metapopulation never decreased-and sometimes substantially increased-the probability of fixation of a new allele compared to metapopulations experiencing homogeneous selection with the same mean selection intensity.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it