MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159481668 · doi:10.1098/rsif.2009.0448

Next-generation tools for evolutionary invasion analyses

2009· review· en· W2159481668 on OpenAlex
Amy Hurford, Daniel Cownden, Troy Day

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Royal Society Interface · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsQueen's University
KeywordsEvolutionarily stable strategyEvolutionary dynamicsEvolutionary algorithmStability (learning theory)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMathematicsMathematical economicsGame theoryPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evolutionary invasion analysis is a powerful technique for modelling in evolutionary biology. The general approach is to derive an expression for the growth rate of a mutant allele encoding some novel phenotype, and then to use this expression to predict long-term evolutionary outcomes. Mathematically, such 'invasion fitness' expressions are most often derived using standard linear stability analyses from dynamical systems theory. Interestingly, there is a mathematically equivalent approach to such stability analyses that is often employed in mathematical epidemiology, and that is based on so-called 'next-generation' matrices. Although this next-generation matrix approach has sometimes also been used in evolutionary invasion analyses, it is not yet common in this area despite the fact that it can sometimes greatly simplify calculations. The aim of this article is to bring the approach to a wider evolutionary audience in two ways. First, we review the next-generation matrix approach and provide a novel, and easily intuited, interpretation of how this approach relates to more standard techniques. Second, we illustrate next-generation methods in evolutionary invasion analysis through a series of informative examples. Although focusing primarily on evolutionary invasion analysis, we provide several insights that apply to biological modelling in general.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.120
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.261 · 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