MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561907498 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btw802

Wright–Fisher exact solver (WFES): scalable analysis of population genetic models without simulation or diffusion theory

2016· article· en· W2561907498 on OpenAlexafffund
Ivan Krukov, Bianca De Sanctis, A. P. Jason de Koning

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsComputer scienceMarkov chainPopulationSolverAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceMachine learningProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivation: The simplifying assumptions that are used widely in theoretical population genetics may not always be appropriate for empirical population genetics. General computational approaches that do not require the assumptions of classical theory are therefore quite desirable. One such general approach is provided by the theory of absorbing Markov chains, which can be used to obtain exact results by directly analyzing population genetic Markov models, such as the classic bi-allelic Wright-Fisher model. Although these approaches are sometimes used, they are usually forgone in favor of simulation methods, due to the perception that they are too computationally burdensome. Here we show that, surprisingly, direct analysis of virtually any Markov chain model in population genetics can be made quite efficient by exploiting transition matrix sparsity and by solving restricted systems of linear equations, allowing a wide variety of exact calculations (within machine precision) to be easily and rapidly made on modern workstation computers. Results: We introduce Wright-Fisher Exact Solver (WFES), a fast and scalable method for direct analysis of Markov chain models in population genetics. WFES can rapidly solve for both long-term and transient behaviours including fixation and extinction probabilities, expected times to fixation or extinction, sojourn times, expected allele age and variance, and others. Our implementation requires only seconds to minutes of runtime on modern workstations and scales to biological population sizes ranging from humans to model organisms. Availability and Implementation: The code is available at https://github.com/dekoning-lab/wfes. Contact: jason.dekoning@ucalgary.ca. Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.439
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.256
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 teacher head, 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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207