Applying an evolutionary mismatch framework to understand disease susceptibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are on the rise worldwide. Obesity, cardiovascular disease, and type 2 diabetes are among a long list of "lifestyle" diseases that were rare throughout human history but are now common. The evolutionary mismatch hypothesis posits that humans evolved in environments that radically differ from those we currently experience; consequently, traits that were once advantageous may now be "mismatched" and disease causing. At the genetic level, this hypothesis predicts that loci with a history of selection will exhibit "genotype by environment" (GxE) interactions, with different health effects in "ancestral" versus "modern" environments. To identify such loci, we advocate for combining genomic tools in partnership with subsistence-level groups experiencing rapid lifestyle change. In these populations, comparisons of individuals falling on opposite extremes of the "matched" to "mismatched" spectrum are uniquely possible. More broadly, the work we propose will inform our understanding of environmental and genetic risk factors for NCDs across diverse ancestries and cultures.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".