Accounting for long-range correlations in genome-wide simulations of large cohorts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coalescent simulations are widely used to examine the effects of evolution and demographic history on the genetic makeup of populations. Thanks to recent progress in algorithms and data structures, simulators such as the widely-used msprime now provide genome-wide simulations for millions of individuals. However, this software relies on classic coalescent theory and its assumptions that sample sizes are small and that the region being simulated is short. Here we show that coalescent simulations of long regions of the genome exhibit large biases in identity-by-descent (IBD), long-range linkage disequilibrium (LD), and ancestry patterns, particularly when the sample size is large. We present a Wright-Fisher extension to msprime, and show that it produces more realistic distributions of IBD, LD, and ancestry proportions, while also addressing more subtle biases of the coalescent. Further, these extensions are more computationally efficient than state-of-the-art coalescent simulations when simulating long regions, including whole-genome data. For shorter regions, efficiency can be maintained via a hybrid model which simulates the recent past under the Wright-Fisher model and uses coalescent simulations in the distant past.
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 | 0.007 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".