MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2569003638 · doi:10.1214/16-aoas964

Inferring rooted population trees using asymmetric neighbor joining

2016· article· en· W2569003638 on OpenAlexaff
Yongliang Zhai, Alexandre Bouchard‐Côté

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annals of Applied Statistics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMathematicsGeographyDemographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a new inference method to estimate evolutionary distances for any two populations to their most recent common ancestral population using single-nucleotide polymorphism allele frequencies. Our model takes fixation into consideration, making it nonreversible, and guarantees that the distribution of reconstructed ancestral frequencies is contained on the interval $[0,1]$. To scale this method to large numbers of populations, we introduce the asymmetric neighbor joining algorithm, an efficient method for reconstructing rooted bifurcating nonclock trees. Asymmetric neighbor joining provides a scalable rooting method applicable to any nonreversible evolutionary modeling setups. We explore the statistical properties of asymmetric neighbor joining, and demonstrate its accuracy on synthetic data. We validate our method by reconstructing rooted phylogenetic trees from the Human Genome Diversity Panel data. Our results are obtained without using an outgroup, and are consistent with the prevalent recent single-origin model.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Annals of Applied StatisticsSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207