ArticleBulletin of mathematical biology2025
Simplifying and Characterizing DAGs and Phylogenetic Networks via Least Common Ancestor Constraints.
Article in Bulletin of mathematical biology, 2025. 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.
- Regularizing and Normalizing DAGs and Phylogenetic Networks.Bulletin of mathematical biology · 2026Article
- Orthology and near-cographs in the context of phylogenetic networks.Algorithms for molecular biology : AMB · 2025Article
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
Rooted phylogenetic networks, or more generally, directed acyclic graphs (DAGs), are widely used to model species or gene relationships that traditional rooted trees cannot fully capture, especially in the presence of reticulate processes or horizontal gene transfers. Such networks or DAGs are typically inferred from observable data (e.g., genomic sequences of extant species), providing only an estimate of the true evolutionary history. However, these inferred DAGs are often complex and difficult to interpret. In particular, many contain vertices that do not serve as least common ancestors (LCAs) for any subset of the underlying genes or species, thus may lack direct support from the observable data. In contrast, LCA vertices are witnessed by historical traces justifying their existence and thus represent ancestral states substantiated by the data. To reduce unnecessary complexity and eliminate unsupported vertices, we aim to simplify a DAG to retain only LCA vertices while preserving essential evolutionary information. In this paper, we characterize
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.