Genetic assignment methods for the direct, real‐time estimation of migration rate: a simulation‐based exploration of accuracy and power
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic assignment methods use genotype likelihoods to draw inference about where individuals were or were not born, potentially allowing direct, real-time estimates of dispersal. We used simulated data sets to test the power and accuracy of Monte Carlo resampling methods in generating statistical thresholds for identifying F0 immigrants in populations with ongoing gene flow, and hence for providing direct, real-time estimates of migration rates. The identification of accurate critical values required that resampling methods preserved the linkage disequilibrium deriving from recent generations of immigrants and reflected the sampling variance present in the data set being analysed. A novel Monte Carlo resampling method taking into account these aspects was proposed and its efficiency was evaluated. Power and error were relatively insensitive to the frequency assumed for missing alleles. Power to identify F0 immigrants was improved by using large sample size (up to about 50 individuals) and by sampling all populations from which migrants may have originated. A combination of plotting genotype likelihoods and calculating mean genotype likelihood ratios (DLR) appeared to be an effective way to predict whether F0 immigrants could be identified for a particular pair of populations using a given set of markers.
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 | 0.049 | 0.161 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".