MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407760641 · doi:10.1098/rstb.2024.0226

A vector representation for phylogenetic trees

2025· article· en· W4407760641 on OpenAlexaff
Cédric Chauve, Caroline Colijn, Louxin Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhylogenetic treeTree rearrangementTree (set theory)Phylogenetic networkComputer sciencePhylogenomicsArtificial intelligenceCombinatoricsAlgorithmMathematicsBiologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Good representations for phylogenetic trees and networks are important for enhancing storage efficiency and scalability for the inference and analysis of evolutionary trees for genes, genomes and species. We propose a new representation for rooted phylogenetic trees that encodes a tree on n ordered taxa as a vector of length 2 n in which each taxon appears exactly twice. Using this new tree representation, we introduce a novel tree rearrangement operator, termed an HOP , that results in a tree space of linear diameter and quadratic neighbourhood size. We also introduce a novel metric, the HOP distance , which is the minimum number of HOPs to transform a tree into another tree. The HOP distance can be computed in near-linear time—a rare instance of tree rearrangement distance that is tractable. Our experiments show that the HOP distance is better correlated to the Subtree-Prune-and-Regraft distance than the widely used Robinson–Foulds distance. We also describe how the proposed tree representation can be further generalized to tree-child networks, showcasing its versatility and potential applications in broader evolutionary analyses. This article is part of the theme issue ‘"A mathematical theory of evolution": phylogenetic models dating back 100 years’.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.008
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences→Same topicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies→French-language works237,207→