HackerPapers

arXiv:1408.3421q-bio.GN

On the genetic architecture of intelligence and other quantitative traits

Stephen D. H. Hsu

Abstract

How do genes affect cognitive ability or other human quantitative traits such as height or disease risk? Progress on this challenging question is likely to be significant in the near future. I begin with a brief review of psychometric measurements of intelligence, introducing the idea of a "general factor" or g score. The main results concern the stability, validity (predictive power), and heritability of adult g. The largest component of genetic variance for both height and intelligence is additive (linear), leading to important simplifications in predictive modeling and statistical estimation. Due mainly to the rapidly decreasing cost of genotyping, it is possible that within the coming decade researchers will identify loci which account for a significant fraction of total g variation. In the case of height analogous efforts are well under way. I describe some unpublished results concerning the genetic architecture of height and cognitive ability, which suggest that roughly 10k moderately rare causal variants of mostly negative effect are responsible for normal population variation. Using results from Compressed Sensing (L1-penalized regression), I estimate the statistical power required to characterize both linear and nonlinear models for quantitative traits. The main unknown parameter s (sparsity) is the number of loci which account for the bulk of the genetic variation. The required sample size is of order 100s, or roughly a million in the case of cognitive ability.

arXiv comments
30 pages, 13 figures; v2 minor edits
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
q-bio.GNGenomics

On Hacker News

Linked by 10 identifiable commenters in 13 comments across 10 threads, from Oct 2014 to Jul 2020. Found in 3 HN submissions from Oct 2014 to Mar 2017. Open submission discussions.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments10 threads

  1. Why Do People Stay Poor? [pdf] 1 comment
    • The article you linked to is helpful but makes several important claims/conclusions that have been convincingly disproved/challenged in the time since 1996. For instance, it claims: > In fact IQ is a great example of a trait that is highly heritable but not genetically…

      nochView on HNParent context

    • No. I think the claim "one can raise IQ several standard deviations by editing <200 alleles" is likely true:https://arxiv.org/pdf/1408.3421.pdf

      wycsView on HNParent context

    • Well, it wasn't wrong, necessarily. A large project in 2013 to start uncovering the genetics of intelligence did in fact finally succeed and end the debate over the heritability of intelligence once and for all. It just wasn't BGI's project... Hsu has acknowledged that it didn't…

      gwernView on HNParent context

    • There's reason to believe that the combined effect from all these different gene variants is approximately linear. Effects caused by multiple variants interacting are difficult for natural selection to operate on because of the way sexual reproduction works. See section 3.1 of…

      rlandayView on HNParent context

    • > But not a straight linear additive effect. It mostly is when you're talking about "why person X has a higher IQ than person Y". It's not when you're asking why or how humans have intelligence at all, obviously. https://arxiv.org/abs/1408.3421

      defenView on HNParent context

    • I agree with this, but not a popular opinion. Hence the down votes you are getting. Korea and China don't have the same memetic immune response to such ideas, injecting one's children with growth hormone in hope of increasing future job prospects, for example, is extremely…

      Moshe_SilnorinView on HNParent context

  2. This is for PZ Myers 1 comment
    • This appears to be a blog argument with little relevance to HN. I'll summarize it as: Physicist Hsu argues that there are techniques by which it may be possible to genetically engineer hyper-intelligent humans. Biologist Myers argues that it's hard to measure intelligence, it's…

      dalkeView on HNParent context

    • Empirically, on average they do better. There are brilliant losers. But brilliant people, on average, are wealthier and have higher status than less-brilliant people. Also, I suspect conscientiousness (another big factor in success) has a significant heritable component. >If you…

      Moshe_SilnorinView on HNParent context

  3. The cult of genius? 1 comment
    • The N. vs S. Korean example you mention is explicitly discussed in one of Hsu's articles. (Secular change in height due to improved environmental conditions.) http://arxiv.org/abs/1408.3421 Section 2.3: "Let me reiterate that within a range of favorable environments (i.e.…

      galtonsieveView on HNParent context

    • The author of that piece on Nautilus also published a paper on the topic: http://arxiv.org/abs/1408.3421

      tucosanView on HNParent context

    • The question of additivity of genetic effects is discussed in more detail in reference [1] above (sections 3.1 and also 4): http://arxiv.org/pdf/1408.3421v2.pdf In plant and animal genetics it is well established that the majority of phenotype variance in complex traits which is…

      stephenhsuView on HNParent context

    • I just realized I've said all of this already in http://arxiv.org/pdf/1408.3421v2.pdf (p.16): ... The preceding discussion is not intended to convey an overly simplistic view of genetics or systems biology. Complex nonlinear genetic systems certainly exist and are realized in…

      stephenhsuView on HNParent context

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.