MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899511768 · doi:10.1101/458695

Indirect genetic effects clarify how traits can evolve even when fitness does not

2018· preprint· en· W2899511768 on OpenAlexaff
David N. Fisher, Andrew G. McAdam

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaladaptationNatural selectionSelection (genetic algorithm)Adaptation (eye)Context (archaeology)Genetic FitnessFitness landscapeInclusive fitnessSocial evolutionBiologyEvolutionary biologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePopulationGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract There are many situations in nature where we expect traits to evolve but not necessarily for mean fitness to increase. However, these scenarios are hard to reconcile simultaneously with Fisher’s Fundamental Theorem of Natural Selection and the Price identity. The consideration of indirect genetic effects on fitness reconciles these fundamental theorems with the observation that traits sometimes evolve without any adaptation, by explicitly considering the correlated evolution of the social environment, which is a form of transmission bias. While transmission bias in the Price identity is often assumed to be absent, here we show that explicitly considering indirect genetic effects as a form of transmission bias for fitness has several benefits: 1) it makes clear how traits can evolve while mean fitness remains stationary, 2) it reconciles the fundamental theorem of natural selection with the evolution of maladaptation, 3) it explicitly includes density-dependent fitness through negative social effects that depend on the number of interacting conspecifics, and 4) its allows mean fitness to evolve even when direct genetic variance in fitness is zero, if related individuals interact and/or if there is multilevel selection. In summary, considering fitness in the context of indirect genetic effects aligns important theorems of natural selection with many situations observed in nature and provides a useful lens through which we might better understand evolution and adaptation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicEvolutionary Game Theory and CooperationFrench-language works237,207