Efficient algorithms for inverting evolution

Proceedings of the Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing

Volumn Part F129452, Issue , 1996, Pages 230-236

  Farach, Martin ^a   Kannan, Sampath ^b  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATION THEORY; DNA; EVOLUTIONARY ALGORITHMS; FORESTRY; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATION; POLYNOMIAL APPROXIMATION; RANDOM PROCESSES; STOCHASTIC MODELS; STOCHASTIC SYSTEMS; TREES (MATHEMATICS); COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; EQUIVALENCE CLASSES; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MATRIX ALGEBRA; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; PERFORMANCE;

CLASS OF DISTRIBUTIONS; EVOLUTIONARY PROCESS; EVOLUTIONARY TREE; GUARANTEED CONVERGENCE; POLYNOMIAL-TIME ALGORITHMS; PROCESS OF EVOLUTION; SIMPLE AND EFFICIENT ALGORITHMS; STOCHASTIC PROCESS MODEL;

BIOINFORMATICS; ALGORITHMS;

MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATION; POLYNOMIAL TIME ALGORITHM;

EID: 0029714314     PISSN: 07378017     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/237814.237868     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (14)

1. R. Agarwala, V. Bafna, M. Farach, B. Narayanan, M. Paterson, and M. Thorup. On the approximability of numerical taxonomy: Fitting distances by tree metrics. Proc. of the 7th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, 1996.
2. J. Cavender. Taxonomy with confidence. Mathematical Biosciences, 40:271-280, 1978.
3. W. H. E. Day, D. S. Johnson, and D. Sankoff. The computational complexity of inferring rooted phylogenies by parsimony. Mathematical Biosciences, 81:33-42, 1986.
4. M. Farach, S. Kannan, and T. Warnow. A robust model for finding optimal evolutionary trees. Algorithmica, 13:155-179, 1993.
5. J. Felsenstein. Cases in which parsimony oc compatibility methods will be positively misleading. Syst. Zool., 22:240-249, 1978.
6. J. Felsenstein. Numerical methods for infecrinng evolutionary trees. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 57(4), 1982.
7. J. Felsenstein. Statistical inference of phylogenies. J. R. Statist. Soc. A, 1983.
8. J. Felsenstein. Phylogenies from molecular sequences: inference and reliability. Annual Review of Genetics, 22:521-65, 1988.
9. R. L. Kashyap and S. Subas. Statistical estimation of parameters in a phylogenetic tree using a dynamic model of the substitutional process. J. theor. Biol., 47:74-101, 1974.
10. Michael Kearns, Yishay Mansour, Dana Ron, Ronitt Rubinfeld, Robert E. Schapire, and Linda Sellie. On the learnability of discrete distributions (extended abstract). Proc. of the 26th Ann. ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing, pages 273-282, 1994.
11. Rajeev Motwani and Prabhakar Raghavan. Randomized Algorithms. Cambridge University Press, 1995.
12. N. Saitou and M. Nei. The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogentic trees. Mol. Biol. Evol., 4:406-424, 1987.
13. M. Steel, M. D. Hendy, and D. Penny. A discrete fourier analysis for evolutionary trees. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 91:3339-3343, 1994.
14. D. L. Swofford and G. J. Olsen. Phylogeny reconstruction. In D. M. Hillis and C. Moritz, editors, Molecular Systematics, pages 411-501. Sinauer Associates Inc., Sunderland, MA., 1990.