MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289365872 · doi:10.2527/af.2016-0010

Genomics for phenotype prediction and management purposes

2016· article· en· W2289365872 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tong Yin, S. König

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Frontiers · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersShandong Agricultural UniversityBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungShandong UniversityUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsHeritabilityBiologyTraitInbreedingGenotypingRuns of HomozygosityGeneticsSNPHerdGenomicsQuantitative trait locusGenomic selectionComputational biologyEvolutionary biologyGenotypeSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGenomeComputer scienceGenePopulationEcologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pre-assuming accuracies of genomic breeding values larger than 0.7 for a moderate heritability production trait, and larger than 0.5 for a low heritability functional trait, additional profit from genotyping female calves or heifers compensates costs for genotyping in commercial herds. Herd management will be improved by including SNP information into electronically mating software, e.g., through the exploitation of non-additive genetic effects and via controlling of inbreeding and genetic relationships. Random forest methodology can infer binary disease phenotypes in validation sets with moderate accuracy, also for a small number of diseased genotyped animals in training sets. Genomic random regression models can be used to predict genomic breeding values for animals without phenotypes in, e.g., harsh environments.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.170

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0510.046

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal FrontiersSame topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockFrench-language works237,207