ArticleGenetics2026
Neural posterior estimation for population genetics.
Article in Genetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Popformer: Learning general signatures of positive selection with a self-supervised transformer.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Coalescence and translation: A language model for population genetics.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Popformer: Learning general signatures of positive selection with a self-supervised transformer.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Simulation-based inference methods are increasingly being used in population genetics due to their flexibility and ability to be applied in settings where likelihood-based methods are intractable. Perhaps the best known such method is Approximate Bayesian Computation (ABC); however, its popularity is offset by its shortcomings which include computational expense and an unfortunate inability to efficiently fit models to high-dimensional summaries of the data. An alternative approach that solves these issues is supervised machine learning (ML); however, ML methods generally do not yield Bayesian uncertainty estimates of the quantities they predict. Here, we apply a recently introduced method, neural posterior estimation, that combines the best facets of ABC and supervised ML by training a neural network to estimate the posterior distribution of a population genetics model. We first compare neural posterior estimation with other inference methods for a variety of population genetic tasks, and show that neural posterior estimators yield posterior distributions with high accuracy and efficiency. We compare learned posterior distributions given raw genotypes and various summary statistics as input data. Additionally, we apply neural posterior estimation for demographic inference for simple and more complex models to highlight its application, including an analysis of demographic history in Drosophila melanogaster. Finally, we provide a user friendly workflow that enables others to perform neural posterior estimation on their own genetic data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.