Perspective: Genomic inference using diffusion models and the allele frequency spectrum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Evolutionary, biological, and demographic processes combine to shape the variation observed in populations. Understanding how these processes are expected to influence variation allows us to infer past demographic events and the nature of selection in human populations. Forward models such as the diffusion approximation provide a powerful tool for analyzing the distribution of allele frequencies in contemporary populations due to their computational tractability and model flexibility. Here, we discuss recent computational developments and their application to reconstructing human demographic history and patterns of selection at new mutations. We also reexamine how some classical assumptions that are still commonly used in inference studies fare when applied to modern data. We use whole-genome sequence data for 797 French Canadian individuals to examine the neutrality of synonymous sites. We find that selection can lead to strong biases in the inferred demography, mutation rate, and distributions of fitness effects. We use these distributions of fitness effects together with demographic and phenotype-fitness models to predict the relationship between effect size and allele frequency, and contrast those predictions to commonly used models in statistical genetics. Thus the simple evolutionary models investigated by Kimura and Ohta still provide important insight into modern genetic research.
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 | 0.006 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".