Exploring Fast Computational Strategies for Probabilistic Phylogenetic Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, the advent of Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) techniques, coupled with modern computational capabilities, has enabled the study of evolutionary models without a closed form solution of the likelihood function. However, current Bayesian MCMC applications can incur significant computational costs, as they are based on a full sampling from the posterior probability distribution of the parameters of interest. Here, we draw attention as to how MCMC techniques can be embedded within normal approximation strategies for more economical statistical computation. The overall procedure is based on an estimate of the first and second moments of the likelihood function, as well as a maximum likelihood estimate. Through examples, we review several MCMC-based methods used in the statistical literature for such estimation, applying the approaches to constructing posterior distributions under non-analytical evolutionary models relaxing the assumptions of rate homogeneity, and of independence between sites. Finally, we use the procedures for conducting Bayesian model selection, based on Laplace approximations of Bayes factors, which we find to be accurate and computationally advantageous. Altogether, the methods we expound here, as well as other related approaches from the statistical literature, should prove useful when investigating increasingly complex descriptions of molecular evolution, alleviating some of the difficulties associated with nonanalytical models.
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 | 0.010 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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".