MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Assessment of patterns of temperature-dependent sex determination using maximum likelihood model selection

2003· article· en· W2543936216 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Matthew H. Godfrey, Virginie Delmas, Marc Girondot

Bibliographic record

VenueEcoscience · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncubationBiologySelection (genetic algorithm)StatisticsMaximum likelihoodMathematicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sex determination in some reptiles is independent of egg incubation temperature and is called genotypic sex determination (GSD). In many other reptiles, sexual phenotype is dependent on incubation temperature. This phenomenon is called temperature-dependent sex determination (TSD). TSD is categorized by three patterns, based on the majority sex produced at lower and higher incubation temperatures, named MF for Male-Female, FM for Female-Male, or FMF for Female-Male-Female. When large numbers of eggs are incubated at many different incubation temperatures, the assessment of TSD pattern is unambiguous, but when few eggs or few incubation temperatures are used, the categorization of TSD pattern is less straightforward. We propose a new methodology based on maximum likelihood model selection that evaluates and ranks the performance of four descriptive models of sex determination for discrete datasets. This method has the added benefit of giving standardized definitions of two commonly reported parameters of TSD: the pivotal temperature and the transitional range of temperature. Standardization of analyses will help facilitate cross-species meta-analyses of TSD in reptiles.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.063
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.063
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations49
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcoscienceSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207