Handling Logical Character Dependency in Phylogenetic Inference: Extensive Performance Testing of Assumptions and Solutions Using Simulated and Empirical Data
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Logical character dependency is a major conceptual and methodological problem in phylogenetic inference of morphological data sets, as it violates the assumption of character independence that is common to all phylogenetic methods. It is more frequently observed in higher-level phylogenies or in data sets characterizing major evolutionary transitions, as these represent parts of the tree of life where (primary) anatomical characters either originate or disappear entirely. As a result, secondary traits related to these primary characters become "inapplicable" across all sampled taxa in which that character is absent. Various solutions have been explored over the last three decades to handle character dependency, such as alternative character coding schemes and, more recently, new algorithmic implementations. However, the accuracy of the proposed solutions, or the impact of character dependency across distinct optimality criteria, has never been directly tested using standard performance measures. Here, we utilize simple and complex simulated morphological data sets analyzed under different maximum parsimony optimization procedures and Bayesian inference to test the accuracy of various coding and algorithmic solutions to character dependency. This is complemented by empirical analyses using a recoded data set on palaeognathid birds. We find that in small, simulated data sets, absent coding performs better than other popular coding strategies available (contingent and multistate), whereas in more complex simulations (larger data sets controlled for different tree structure and character distribution models) contingent coding is favored more frequently. Under contingent coding, a recently proposed weighting algorithm produces the most accurate results for maximum parsimony. However, Bayesian inference outperforms all parsimony-based solutions to handle character dependency due to fundamental differences in their optimization procedures-a simple alternative that has been long overlooked. Yet, we show that the more primary characters bearing secondary (dependent) traits there are in a data set, the harder it is to estimate the true phylogenetic tree, regardless of the optimality criterion, owing to a considerable expansion of the tree parameter space. [Bayesian inference, character dependency, character coding, distance metrics, morphological phylogenetics, maximum parsimony, performance, phylogenetic accuracy.].
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it