MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128020980 · doi:10.1145/1132516.1132540

Optimal phylogenetic reconstruction

2006· article· en· W2128020980 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Constantinos Daskalakis, Elchanan Mossel, Sébastien Roch

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHarvard UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTree (set theory)Phylogenetic treeMarkov chainMathematicsCombinatoricsAlgorithmTree rearrangementSequence (biology)Discrete mathematicsBiologyStatisticsGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the major tasks of evolutionary biology is the reconstruction of phylogenetic trees from molecular data. The evolutionary model is given by a Markov chain on the true evolutionary tree. Given samples from this Markov chain at the leaves of the tree, the goal is to reconstruct the evolutionary tree.It is well known that in order to reconstruct a tree on n leaves, sequences of length Ω(log n) are needed. It was conjectured by M. Steel that for the CFN evolutionary model, if the mutation probability on all edges of the tree is less than p* = (√2-1)/23/2, then the tree can be recovered from sequences of length O(log n). This was proven by the second author in the special case where the tree is "balanced". The second author also proved that if all edges have mutation probability larger than p* then the length needed is nΩ(1). This "phase-transition" in the number of samples needed is closely related to the phase transition for the reconstruction problem (or extremality of free measure) studied extensively in statistical physics, probability and computer science.Here we complete the proof of Steel's conjecture and give a reconstruction algorithm using optimal (up to a multiplicative constant) sequence length. Our results further extend to obtain an optimal reconstruction algorithm for the Jukes-Cantor model with short edges. All reconstruction algorithms run in polynomial time.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.199 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations90
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAlgorithms and Data CompressionFrench-language works237,207