MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147307434 · doi:10.1093/molbev/msh112

A Bayesian Mixture Model for Across-Site Heterogeneities in the Amino-Acid Replacement Process

2004· article· en· W2147307434 on OpenAlexaff
Nicolas Lartillot, Hervé Philippe

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology and Evolution · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyProcess (computing)Bayesian probabilityComputational biologyEvolutionary biologyArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most current models of sequence evolution assume that all sites of a protein evolve under the same substitution process, characterized by a 20 x 20 substitution matrix. Here, we propose to relax this assumption by developing a Bayesian mixture model that allows the amino-acid replacement pattern at different sites of a protein alignment to be described by distinct substitution processes. Our model, named CAT, assumes the existence of distinct processes (or classes) differing by their equilibrium frequencies over the 20 residues. Through the use of a Dirichlet process prior, the total number of classes and their respective amino-acid profiles, as well as the affiliations of each site to a given class, are all free variables of the model. In this way, the CAT model is able to adapt to the complexity actually present in the data, and it yields an estimate of the substitutional heterogeneity through the posterior mean number of classes. We show that a significant level of heterogeneity is present in the substitution patterns of proteins, and that the standard one-matrix model fails to account for this heterogeneity. By evaluating the Bayes factor, we demonstrate that the standard model is outperformed by CAT on all of the data sets which we analyzed. Altogether, these results suggest that the complexity of the pattern of substitution of real sequences is better captured by the CAT model, offering the possibility of studying its impact on phylogenetic reconstruction and its connections with structure-function determinants.

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)0.011
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations1,608
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology and EvolutionSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207