fullfact: an R package for the analysis of genetic and maternal variance components from full factorial mating designs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Full factorial breeding designs are useful for quantifying the amount of additive genetic, nonadditive genetic, and maternal variance that explain phenotypic traits. Such variance estimates are important for examining evolutionary potential. Traditionally, full factorial mating designs have been analyzed using a two-way analysis of variance, which may produce negative variance values and is not suited for unbalanced designs. Mixed-effects models do not produce negative variance values and are suited for unbalanced designs. However, extracting the variance components, calculating significance values, and estimating confidence intervals and/or power values for the components are not straightforward using traditional analytic methods. We introduce fullfact - an R package that addresses these issues and facilitates the analysis of full factorial mating designs with mixed-effects models. Here, we summarize the functions of the fullfact package. The observed data functions extract the variance explained by random and fixed effects and provide their significance. We then calculate the additive genetic, nonadditive genetic, and maternal variance components explaining the phenotype. In particular, we integrate nonnormal error structures for estimating these components for nonnormal data types. The resampled data functions are used to produce bootstrap-t confidence intervals, which can then be plotted using a simple function. We explore the fullfact package through a worked example. This package will facilitate the analyses of full factorial mating designs in R, especially for the analysis of binary, proportion, and/or count data types and for the ability to incorporate additional random and fixed effects and power analyses.
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 | 0.008 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.101 | 0.052 |
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".