Systematic investigations of gene effects on both topologies and supports: An <i>Echinococcus</i> illustration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we propose a high performance computing toolbox implementing efficient statistical methods for the study of phylogenies. This toolbox, which implements logit models and LASSO-type penalties, gives a way to better understand, measure, and compare the impact of each gene on a global phylogeny. As an application, we study the Echinococcus phylogeny, which is often considered as a particularly difficult example. Mitochondrial and nuclear genomes (19 coding sequences) of nine Echinococcus species are considered in order to investigate the molecular phylogeny of this genus. First, we check that the 19 gene trees lead to 19 totally different unsupported topologies (a topology is the sister relationship when both branch lengths and supports are ignored in a phylogenetic tree), while using the 19 genes as a whole are not sufficient for estimating the phylogeny. In order to circumvent this issue and understand the impact of the genes, we computed 43,796 trees using combinations ranging from 13 to 19 genes. By doing so, 15 topologies are obtained. Four particular topologies, appearing more robust and frequent, are then selected for more precise investigation. Refining further our statistical analysis, a particularly robust topology is extracted. We also carefully demonstrate the influence of nuclear genes on the likelihood of the phylogeny.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".