ArticleSystematic biology2022
Comparing Partitioned Models to Mixture Models: Do Information Criteria Apply?
Article in Systematic biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing Partition and Mixture Models with Akaike Information Criteria.Systematic biology · 2026Article
- Reply to: Uncertainties in the phylogeny and biogeography of cave crickets.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Infinite Mixture Models for Improved Modeling of Across-Site Evolutionary Variation.Molecular biology and evolution · 2025Article
- MixtureFinder: Estimating DNA Mixture Models for Phylogenetic Analyses.Molecular biology and evolution · 2025Article
- Organellar phylogenomics at the epidendroid orchid base, with a focus on the mycoheterotrophic Wullschlaegelia.Annals of botany · 2024Article
- Unifying mortality forecasting model: an investigation of the COM-Poisson distribution in the GAS model for improved projections.Lifetime data analysis · 2024Article
- Confusion will be my epitaph: genome-scale discordance stifles phylogenetic resolution of Holothuroidea.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Performance of Akaike Information Criterion and Bayesian Information Criterion in Selecting Partition Models and Mixture Models.Systematic biology · 2023Article
- Structure-Based GC Investigation Sheds New Light on ITS2 Evolution inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Neogastropod (Mollusca, Gastropoda) phylogeny: A step forward with mitogenomes.Zoologica scripta · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of information criteria to distinguish between phylogenetic models has become ubiquitous within the field. However, the variety and complexity of available models are much greater now than when these practices were established. The literature shows an increasing trajectory of healthy skepticism with regard to the use of information theory-based model selection within phylogenetics. We add to this by analyzing the specific case of comparison between partition and mixture models. We argue from a theoretical basis that information criteria are inherently more likely to favor partition models over mixture models, and we then demonstrate this through simulation. Based on our findings, we suggest that partition and mixture models are not suitable for information-theory based model comparison. [AIC, BIC; information criteria; maximum likelihood; mixture models; partitioned model; phylogenetics.].
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.