A new efficient algorithm for inferring explicit hybridization networks following the Neighbor-Joining principle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several algorithms and software have been developed for inferring phylogenetic trees. However, there exist some biological phenomena such as hybridization, recombination, or horizontal gene transfer which cannot be represented by a tree topology. We need to use phylogenetic networks to adequately represent these important evolutionary mechanisms. In this article, we present a new efficient heuristic algorithm for inferring hybridization networks from evolutionary distance matrices between species. The famous Neighbor-Joining concept and the least-squares criterion are used for building networks. At each step of the algorithm, before joining two given nodes, we check if a hybridization event could be related to one of them or to both of them. The proposed algorithm finds the exact tree solution when the considered distance matrix is a tree metric (i.e. it is representable by a unique phylogenetic tree). It also provides very good hybrids recovery rates for large trees (with 32 and 64 leaves in our simulations) for both distance and sequence types of data. The results yielded by the new algorithm for real and simulated datasets are illustrated and discussed in detail.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".