Estimating Evolution of Temporal Sequence Changes: A Practical Approach to Inferring Ancestral Developmental Sequences and Sequence Heterochrony
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
Developmental biology often yields data in a temporal context. Temporal data in phylogenetic systematics has important uses in the field of evolutionary developmental biology and, in general, comparative biology. The evolution of temporal sequences, specifically developmental sequences, has proven difficult to examine due to the highly variable temporal progression of development. Issues concerning the analysis of temporal sequences and problems with current methods of analysis are discussed. We present here an algorithm to infer ancestral temporal sequences, quantify sequence heterochronies, and estimate pseudoreplicate consensus support for sequence changes using Parsimov-based genetic inference [PGi]. Real temporal developmental sequence data sets are used to compare PGi with currently used approaches, and PGi is shown to be the most efficient, accurate, and practical method to examine biological data and infer ancestral states on a phylogeny. The method is also expandable to address further issues in developmental evolution, namely modularity.
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