A simulated annealing algorithm for maximum likelihood pedigree reconstruction

Theoretical Population Biology

Volumn 63, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 63-75

  Almudevar, Anthony ^a  

^a ACADIA UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Maximum likelihood; Pedigree reconstruction; Simulated annealing

Indexed keywords

ANNEALING; GENEALOGY; GENOTYPE; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ANALYSIS; POPULATION GENETICS;

SATELLITE DNA;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CANADA; GENETICS; GENOTYPE; HUMAN; PEDIGREE; STATISTICAL MODEL; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ALGORITHMS; CANADA; DNA, SATELLITE; GENOTYPE; HUMANS; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PEDIGREE;

EID: 0038620466     PISSN: 00405809     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0040-5809(02)00048-5     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Aarts E., Korst J. Simulated Annealing and Boltzmann Machines. 1989;Wiley, Chichester.
2. Aarts E., van Laarhoven P.J.M. Statistical cooling. a general approach to combinatorial optimization problems Philips J. Res. 40:1985;193-226.
3. Aarts, E., van Laarhoven, P.J.M., 1985b. A new polynomial-time cooling schedule. Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computer-Aided Design, Santa Clara, November 1985, pp. 206-208.
4. Almudevar A. A bootstrap assessment of variability in pedigree reconstruction based on DNA markers. Biometrics. 57:2001;757-763.
5. Almudevar A., Field C. Estimation of single generation sibling relationships based on DNA markers. J. Agric. Biol. Environ. Stat. 2:1999;212-229.
6. Blouin M.S., Parsons M., Lacaille V., Lotz S. Use of microsatellite loci to classify individuals by relatedness. Mol. Ecol. 5:1996;393-401.
7. Bruford M.W., Wayne R.K. Microsatellites and their application to population genetic studies. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 3:1993;939-943.
8. Cannings C., Thompson E. Genealogical and Genetic Structure. 1981;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
9. Geyer C.J., Ryder O.A., Chemnick L.G., Thompson E.A. Analysis of relatedness in the California condors. from DNA fingerprints Mol. Biol. Evol. 10:1993;571-589.
10. Gusfield D. Partition-distance. a problem and class of perfect graphs arising in clustering Inf. Process. Lett. 82:2002;159-164.
11. Haig S.M., Ballou J.D., Casna N.J. Identification of kin structure among Guam rail founders. a comparison of pedigrees and DNA profiles Mol. Ecol. 3:1994;109-119.
12. Kirkpatrick S., Gelatt C.D. Jr., Vecchi M.P. Optimization by simulated annealing. Science. 220:1983;671-680.
13. Lynch M. Estimation of relatedness by DNA fingerprinting. Mol. Biol. Evol. 5:1988;584-599.
14. Marshall T.C., Slate J., Kruuk L.E.B., Pemberton J.M. Statistical confidence for likelihood-based paternity inference in natural populations. Mol. Ecol. 7:1998;639-655.
15. Meagher T.R., Thompson E. The relationship between single parent and parent pair genetic likelihoods in genealogy reconstruction. Theor. Popul. Biol. 29:1986;87-106.
16. Meagher T.R., Thompson E. Analysis of parentage for naturally established seedlings of chamaelirium luteum. (liliacae) Ecology. 68:1987;803-812.
17. Metropolis N., Rosenbluth A.W., Rosenbluth M.N., Teller A.H., Teller E. Equations of state calculations by fast computing machines. J. Chem. Phys. 21:1953;1087-1092.
18. Painter, I., 1994. Analysis of full-sibship configurations in a maternal half-sibship. Technical Report No. 272, Dept. of Statistics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
19. Painter I. Sibling reconstruction without parental information. J. Agric. Biol. Environ. Stat. 2:1996;212-229.
20. Queller D.C., Goodnight K.F. Estimating relatedness using genetic markers. Evolution. 43:1989;258-279.
21. Thompson E. Gene identities and multiple relationships. Biometrics. 30:1974;667-680.
22. Thompson E. Estimation of pairwise relationships. Ann. Hum. Genet. 39:1975;173-188.
23. Thompson E. Inference of genealogical structure. Soc. Sci. Inf. 15:1976;477-526.
24. Thompson E. A paradox of genealogical inference. Adv. Appl. Probab. 8:1976;648-650.