MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2596012462 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btw744

node.dating: dating ancestors in phylogenetic trees in R

2016· article· en· W2596012462 on OpenAlexafffund
Bradley R. Jones, Art F. Y. Poon

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEvolution and Paleontology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaWestern UniversityAIDS VancouverSimon Fraser University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPhylogenetic treeNode (physics)Divergence (linguistics)Tree (set theory)ENCODEComputer scienceSoftwarePhylogeneticsEvolutionary biologyBiologyGeneMathematicsGeneticsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary: Phylogenetic trees encode the evolutionary distances between species or populations. With sufficient information, these evolutionary distances can be rescaled over time to provide estimates of the dates of the most recent ancestors of the species. Here we present the R program node.dating, divergence-time analysis software, which uses a maximum-likelihood method to estimate the dates of the internal nodes of a phylogenetic tree. Availability and Implementation: node.dating is available as a part of the R v3.30 package ape v4.0 (cran.r-project.org). node.dating is also available in the GitHub repository: https://github.com/brj1/node.dating , along with supplementary software and tests. Contact: brj1@sfu.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 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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.061
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.061
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0020.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1050.118

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations21
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicEvolution and Paleontology StudiesFrench-language works237,207