Assessing haplotype-based models for genomic evaluation in Holstein cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A single-nucleotide polymorphisms-based genomic relationship matrix (G SNP ) discriminate less identity by state from identity by descent (IBD) alleles compared with a multi-locus haplotype-based relationship matrix (G HAP ), which can better capture IBD alleles and recent relationships. We aimed to compare the prediction reliability and prediction bias of genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) using either G SNP or G HAP in Holstein cattle. Therefore, a total of 57 traits with a wide range of heritability values were analyzed. Classical validation tests were done using a validation dataset comprised of 50k genotype records of 561–669 proven bulls born in 2010–2011 with an official estimated breeding value (EBV) in 2016 and a training set of 5314–19 678 bulls born before 2010, depending on the trait. The method for building the genomic relationship matrix (G) had significant, but small effect on observed reliability (r 2 GEBV ) (p < 0.0001) and bias (p < 0.0001). A significant interaction between G and the level of trait heritability on r 2 GEBV and bias was also observed (p < 0.0001). The small gains in r 2 GEBV and small reductions in the bias by using G HAP BLUP were increased when predicting moderate to high-heritability traits compared with low-heritability traits.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".