MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903615111 · doi:10.1101/489401

Models of archaic admixture and recent history from two-locus statistics

2018· preprint· en· W2903615111 on OpenAlexaff
Aaron P. Ragsdale, Simon Gravel

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicForensic and Genetic Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographic historyLinkage disequilibriumInferencePopulationEvolutionary biologyRange (aeronautics)DisequilibriumGenetic diversityBiologyLocus (genetics)Coalescent theoryPopulation geneticsAllelePhylogeneticsComputer scienceDemographyGeneticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We learn about population history and underlying evolutionary biology through patterns of genetic polymorphism. Many approaches to reconstruct evolutionary histories focus on a limited number of informative statistics describing distributions of allele frequencies or patterns of linkage disequilibrium. We show that many commonly used statistics are part of a broad family of two-locus moments whose expectation can be computed jointly and rapidly under a wide range of scenarios, including complex multi-population demographies with continuous migration and admixture events. A full inspection of these statistics reveals that widely used models of human history fail to predict simple patterns of linkage disequilibrium. To jointly capture the information contained in classical and novel statistics, we implemented a tractable likelihood-based inference framework for demographic history. Using this approach, we show that human evolutionary models that include archaic admixture in Africa, Asia, and Europe provide a much better description of patterns of genetic diversity across the human genome. We estimate that an unidentified, deeply diverged population admixed with modern humans within Africa both before and after the split of African and Eurasian populations, contributing 4 - 8% genetic ancestry to individuals in world-wide populations. Author Summary Throughout human history, populations have expanded and contracted, split and merged, and ex-changed migrants. Because these events affected genetic diversity, we can learn about human history by comparing predictions from evolutionary models to genetic data. Here, we show how to rapidly compute such predictions for a wide range of diversity measures within and across populations under complex demographic scenarios. While widely used models of human history accurately predict common measures of diversity, we show that they strongly underestimate the co-occurence of low frequency mutations within human populations in Asia, Europe, and Africa. Models allowing for archaic admixture, the relatively recent mixing of human populations with deeply diverged human lineages, resolve this discrepancy. We use such models to infer demographic models that include both recent and ancient features of human history. We recover the well-characterized admixture of Neanderthals in Eurasian populations, as well as admixture from an as-yet unknown diverged human population within Africa, further suggesting that admixture with deeply diverged lineages occurred multiple times in human history. By simultaneously testing model predictions for a broad range of diversity statistics, we can assess the robustness of common evolutionary models, identify missing historical events, and build more informed models of human demography.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations28
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicForensic and Genetic ResearchFrench-language works237,207