ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026
Can you trust your reconstructed lineage tree? A homoplasy-based approach for irreversible evolution.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Phylogeny inference is a fundamental problem in computational biology, with many proposed algorithms. Emerging techniques that couple single-cell genomics with Cas9-based genome editing open the way for in-depth analysis of cell phylogenies that underlie processes of clonal expansion, selection and diversification, from embryogenesis to cancer. A key distinguishing feature of cell lineage analysis with these techniques is the non-modifiability of Cas9-induced mutations, which motivates revisiting questions in phylogenetics. In this work, we ask one such fundamental question: is it possible to assess the reliability of an inferred lineage tree, even though we do not know its underlying ground truth? We present a homoplasy-based approach for this question that leverages the non-modifiability property. We show via simulations that under a broad range of settings, our method can effectively distinguish accurate reconstructions out of a pool of candidate solutions. Importantly, our homoplasy-based score is substantially more powerful than the commonly used parsimony score - a result that we back by both empirical and theoretical analysis. The computation of the homoplasy score is simple and scalable, thus opening the way for more rigorous analysis of cell lineages.
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.