Recent discussions elsewhere demonstrate that the specification of the genetic value objects is confusing.
Specifically, the ndemes field is a kludge.
Ideally, gvalue would be a list of one object per deme. The dimensionality of each object has to line up with the dimensionality of the effect size distribution. In other words, multi-deme models with pleiotropy** and multi-deme models with correlated effect sizes across demes need to be conceptually unified.
Recent discussions elsewhere demonstrate that the specification of the genetic value objects is confusing. Specifically, the
ndemes
field is a kludge.Ideally,
gvalue
would be a list of one object per deme. The dimensionality of each object has to line up with the dimensionality of the effect size distribution. In other words, multi-deme models with pleiotropy** and multi-deme models with correlated effect sizes across demes need to be conceptually unified.**do we even support this?