MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2620357308 · doi:10.1101/143594

Evolutionary Isolation and Phylogenetic Diversity Loss Under Random Extinction Events

2017· preprint· en· W2620357308 on OpenAlexaff
Mike Steel, Vahab Pourfaraj, Abhishek Chaudhary, Arne Ø. Mooers

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtinction (optical mineralogy)Phylogenetic treePhylogenetic diversityTree (set theory)BiologyIsolation (microbiology)Evolutionary biologyNull modelMathematicsEcologyCombinatoricsGeneticsPaleontologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The extinction of species at the present leads to the loss of ‘phylogenetic diversity’ (PD) from the evolutionary tree in which these species lie. Prior to extinction, the total PD present can be divided up among the species in various ways using measures of evolutionary isolation (such as ‘fair proportion’ and ‘equal splits’). However, the loss of PD when certain combinations of species become extinct can be either larger or smaller than the cumulative loss of the isolation values associated with the extinct species. In this paper, we show that for trees generated under neutral evolutionary models, the loss of PD under a null model of random extinction at the present can be predicted from the loss of the cumulative isolation values, by applying a non-linear transformation that is independent of the tree. Moreover, the error in the prediction provably converges to zero as the size of the tree grows, with simulations showing good agreement even for moderate sized trees ( n = 64).

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207