MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2916620889

Mendelian Sampling variance tests with genomic preselection

2019· article· en· W2916620889 on OpenAlexaffabout
P G Sullivan

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin - International Bull Evaluation Service/Interbull bulletin · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsCanadian Dairy Commission
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMendelian inheritanceVariance (accounting)BiologyStatisticsTest (biology)Computer scienceGeneticsMathematicsAccountingGene
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interbull has introduced a new validation test, and provided corresponding software to detect non-zero time trends and outliers years, for estimates of genetic variance.  The test is applied separately for cows and AI sires, for all traits included in the Interbull MACE evaluation service.  In recent years, AI sires have been genomically preselected, using genotype-based evaluations when they were young calves.  Genomic preselection significantly changes the expectation of Mendelian sampling distributions for AI bulls.  The new Interbull test is applied to EBV computed without genotypes, which are biased by ignored genomic preselection effects.  The purposes of the present study were to apply the new validation test to Canadian data, firstly using official EBV submitted for MACE, and secondly using corrected EBV, after making adjustments to reduce preselection biases in the MS distributions of the most recent AI bulls.  For the main traits under selection in Canada, test results were a pass for official EBV, but a fail for bias-corrected EBV.  For bull populations with genomic preselection, biased EBV are expected to pass the test, while unbiased data are expected to fail.

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)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.168
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.168
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin - International Bull Evaluation Service/Interbull bulletinSame topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockFrench-language works237,207