ArticlePLoS computational biology2024
Reliable estimation of tree branch lengths using deep neural networks.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2024. 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.
- Parameter Estimation from Phylogenetic Trees Using Neural Networks and Ensemble Learning.Systematic biology · 2026Article
- Phylogenetic Methods Meet Deep Learning.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Article
- Cancer phylogenetic inference using copy number alterations detected from DNA sequencing data.Cancer pathogenesis and therapy · 2025Review
- Isolation, identification, and genomic analysis of bacteriophage GJKY-A for the prevention and treatment of citrus canker.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Deep Learning and Likelihood Approaches for Viral Phylogeography Converge on the Same Answers Whether the Inference Model Is Right or Wrong.Systematic biology · 2024Article
- AliSim-HPC: parallel sequence simulator for phylogenetics.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
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
Abstract
A phylogenetic tree represents hypothesized evolutionary history for a set of taxa. Besides the branching patterns (i.e., tree topology), phylogenies contain information about the evolutionary distances (i.e. branch lengths) between all taxa in the tree, which include extant taxa (external nodes) and their last common ancestors (internal nodes). During phylogenetic tree inference, the branch lengths are typically co-estimated along with other phylogenetic parameters during tree topology space exploration. There are well-known regions of the branch length parameter space where accurate estimation of phylogenetic trees is especially difficult. Several novel studies have recently demonstrated that machine learning approaches have the potential to help solve phylogenetic problems with greater accuracy and computational efficiency. In this study, as a proof of concept, we sought to explore the possibility of machine learning models to predict branch lengths. To that end, we designed several deep learning frameworks to estimate branch lengths on fixed tree topologies from multiple sequence alignments or its representations. Our results show that deep learning methods can exhibit superior performance in some difficult regions of branch length parameter space. For example, in contrast to maximum likelihood inference, which is typically used for estimating branch lengths, deep learning methods are more efficient and accurate. In general, we find that our neural networks achieve similar accuracy to a Bayesian approach and are the best-performing methods when inferring long branches that are associated with distantly related taxa. Together, our findings represent a next step toward accurate, fast, and reliable phylogenetic inference with machine learning approaches.
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.