ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2022
A LASSO-based approach to sample sites for phylogenetic tree search.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of phylogenetic informativeness in mitochondrial and nuclear genes for mammalian systematics using sparse learning.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- A machine-learning-based alternative to phylogenetic bootstrap.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
motivationIn recent years, full-genome sequences have become increasingly available and as a result many modern phylogenetic analyses are based on very long sequences, often with over 100 000 sites. Phylogenetic reconstructions of large-scale alignments are challenging for likelihood-based phylogenetic inference programs and usually require using a powerful computer cluster. Current tools for alignment trimming prior to phylogenetic analysis do not promise a significant reduction in the alignment size and are claimed to have a negative effect on the accuracy of the obtained tree.
resultsHere, we propose an artificial-intelligence-based approach, which provides means to select the optimal subset of sites and a formula by which one can compute the log-likelihood of the entire data based on this subset. Our approach is based on training a regularized Lasso-regression model that optimizes the log-likelihood prediction accuracy while putting a constraint on the number of sites used for the approximation. We show that computing the likelihood based on 5% of the sites already provides accurate approximation of the tree likelihood based on the entire data. Furthermore, we show that using this Lasso-based approximation during a tree search decreased running-time substantially while retaining the same tree-search performance. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The code was implemented in Python version 3.8 and is available through GitHub (https://github.com/noaeker/lasso_positions_sampling). The datasets used in this paper were retrieved from Zhou et al. (2018) as described in section 3. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
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.