MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388682255 · doi:10.1098/rsif.2023.0424

Evolutionary rescue on genotypic fitness landscapes

2023· article· en· W4388682255 on OpenAlexafffund
Lindi M. Wahl, Paulo R. A. Campos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Royal Society Interface · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsBiologyMutationAdaptation (eye)TraitMutation rateGenetic FitnessEvolutionary biologyEvolutionary dynamicsSelection (genetic algorithm)Fitness landscapeEvolvabilityNatural selectionExtinction (optical mineralogy)GeneticsGenePopulationComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Populations facing adverse environments, novel pathogens or invasive competitors may be destined to extinction if they are unable to adapt rapidly. Quantitative predictions of the probability of survival through adaptation, evolutionary rescue, have been previously developed for one of the most natural and well-studied mappings from an organism's traits to its fitness, Fisher's geometric model (FGM). While FGM assumes that all possible trait values are accessible via mutation, in many applications only a finite set of rescue mutations will be available, such as mutations conferring resistance to a parasite, predator or toxin. We predict the probability of evolutionary rescue, via de novo mutation, when this underlying genetic structure is included. We find that rescue probability is always reduced when its genetic basis is taken into account. Unlike other known features of the genotypic FGM, however, the probability of rescue increases monotonically with the number of available mutations and approaches the behaviour of the classical FGM as the number of available mutations approaches infinity.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Royal Society InterfaceSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207