ArticleJournal of mathematical biology2021
Corrigendum to "Best match graphs".
Article in Journal of mathematical biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- REvolutionH-tl 2.0: A fast and robust tool for decoding evolutionary gene histories.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Orthology and near-cographs in the context of phylogenetic networks.Algorithms for molecular biology : AMB · 2025Article
- The Theory of Gene Family Histories.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024Article
- A simpler linear-time algorithm for the common refinement of rooted phylogenetic trees on a common leaf set.Algorithms for molecular biology : AMB · 2021Article
- Heuristic algorithms for best match graph editing.Algorithms for molecular biology : AMB · 2021Article
- Indirect identification of horizontal gene transfer.Journal of mathematical biology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum for
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two errors in the article Best Match Graphs (Geiß et al. in JMB 78: 2015-2057, 2019) are corrected. One concerns the tacit assumption that digraphs are sink-free, which has to be added as an additional precondition in Lemma 9, Lemma 11, Theorem 4. Correspondingly, Algorithm 2 requires that its input is sink-free. The second correction concerns an additional necessary condition in Theorem 9 required to characterize best match graphs. The amended results simplify the construction of least resolved trees for n-cBMGs, i.e., Algorithm 1. All other results remain unchanged and are correct as stated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.