MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377224888 · doi:10.1101/gr.277669.123

A fast and scalable method for inferring phylogenetic networks from trees by aligning lineage taxon strings

2023· article· en· W4377224888 on OpenAlexaff
Louxin Zhang, Niloufar Abhari, Caroline Colijn, Yufeng Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersMinistry of Education, IndiaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhylogenetic treePhylogenetic networkBiologyPhylogeneticsComputational phylogeneticsTree (set theory)TaxonEvolutionary biologyLineage (genetic)Phylogenetic comparative methodsTree rearrangementCombinatoricsMathematicsGeneticsEcologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The reconstruction of phylogenetic networks is an important but challenging problem in phylogenetics and genome evolution, as the space of phylogenetic networks is vast and cannot be sampled well. One approach to the problem is to solve the minimum phylogenetic network problem, in which phylogenetic trees are first inferred, and then the smallest phylogenetic network that displays all the trees is computed. The approach takes advantage of the fact that the theory of phylogenetic trees is mature, and there are excellent tools available for inferring phylogenetic trees from a large number of biomolecular sequences. A tree-child network is a phylogenetic network satisfying the condition that every nonleaf node has at least one child that is of indegree one. Here, we develop a new method that infers the minimum tree-child network by aligning lineage taxon strings in the phylogenetic trees. This algorithmic innovation enables us to get around the limitations of the existing programs for phylogenetic network inference. Our new program, named ALTS, is fast enough to infer a tree-child network with a large number of reticulations for a set of up to 50 phylogenetic trees with 50 taxa that have only trivial common clusters in about a quarter of an hour on average.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score0.726

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenome ResearchSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207