Skip to main content
Log in

Inverting random functions

  • Published:
Annals of Combinatorics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper we study how to invert random functions under different criteria. The motivation for this study is phylogeny reconstruction, since the evolution of biomolecular sequences may be considered as a random function from the set of possible phylogenetic trees to the set of collections of biomolecular sequences of observed species. Our results may affect how we think about maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) in phylogeny. For inverting random functions, MLE is optimal under a first criterion, although it is not optimal under a second criterion which is at least equally natural but more conservative. Furthemore, MLE has to be used differently from the way it has been used in the phylogeny literature, if we have a prior distribution on trees and mutation mechanisms and want to keep MLE optimal under the same first criterion. Some of the results of this paper have been known in the setting of statistical decision theory, but have never been discussed in the context of phylogeny.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

References

  1. D.J. Aldous, Probability distributions on cladograms, In: Discrete Random Structures, D.J. Aldous and R. Permantle, Eds., IMA Vol. in Mathematics and its Applications, Vol. 76, Springer-Verlag, 1995, pp. 1–18.

  2. A. Ambainis, R. Desper, M. Farach, and S. Kannan, Nearly tight bounds on the learnability of evolution, Proc. of the 38th IEEE Conference on the Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'97), 1997, pp. 524–533.

  3. J.O. Berger, Statistical Decision Theory and Bayesian Analysis, 2nd Ed., Springer Series in Statistics, Springer-Verlag, 1985.

  4. J.K.M. Brown, Probabilities of evolutionary trees, Syst. Biol.43 (1994) 78–91.

    Google Scholar 

  5. J.A. Cavender, Taxonomy with confidence, Math. Biosci.40 (1978) 270–280.

    Google Scholar 

  6. M. Cryan, L.A. Goldberg, and P.W. Goldberg, Evolutionary trees can be learned in polynomial time in the two-state general Markov model, Proc. 39th Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'98), 1998, pp. 436–445.

  7. R. Durbin, S. Eddy, A. Krogh, and G. Mitchison, Biological sequence analysis: Probabilistic models of proteins and nucleic acids, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  8. P.L. Erdős, M.A. Steel, L.A. Székely, and T. Warnow, A few logs suffice to build (almost) all trees I, Random Structures and Algorithms14 (1999) 153–184.

    Google Scholar 

  9. P.L. Erdős, M.A. Steel, L.A. Székely, and T. Warnow, A few logs suffice to build (almost) all trees II, to appear in Theoretical Computer Science.

  10. M. Farach and S. Kannan, Efficient algorithms for inverting evolution, Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on the Foundations of Computer Science, 1996, pp. 230–236.

  11. J. Felsenstein, Cases in which parsimony or compatibility methods will be positively misleading, Syst. Zool.27 (1978) 401–410.

    Google Scholar 

  12. J. Felsenstein, Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: A maximum likelihood approach, J. Mol. Evol.17 (1981) 368–376.

    Google Scholar 

  13. E.F. Harding, The probabilities of rooted tree shapes generated by random bifurcation, Adv. Appl. Probab.3 (1971) 44–77.

    Google Scholar 

  14. M. Kimura, Estimation of evolutionary distances between homologous nucleotide sequences, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA78 (1981) 454–458.

    Google Scholar 

  15. M. Marcus and H. Minc, A Survey of Matrix Theory and Matrix Inequalities, Dover Publications Inc., New York, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  16. J. Neyman, Molecular studies of evolution: A source of novel statistical problems, In: Statistical Decision Theory and Related Topics, S.S. Gupta and J. Yackel, Eds., Academic Press, New York, 1971, pp. 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  17. A. Schrijver, Theory of Linear and Integer Programming, Wiley-Interscience Series in Discrete Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Chichester, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  18. M.E. Siddall, Success of parsimony in the four-taxon case: Long-branch repulsion by likelihood in the Farris Zone, Cladistics14 (1998) 209–220.

    Google Scholar 

  19. M. Steel, M.D. Hendy, and D. Penny, Reconstructing trees from nucleotide pattern probabilities: A survey and some new results, Discrete Appl. Math.88 (1998) 367–396.

    Google Scholar 

  20. D.L. Swofford, G.J. Olsen, P.J. Waddell, and D.M. Hillis, Chapter 11: Phylogenetic inference, In: Molecular Systematics, D.M. Hillis, C. Moritz, and B.K. Mable, Eds., 2nd Ed., Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland, 1996, pp. 407–514.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Z. Yang and B. Rannala, A Markov Chain Monte Carlo Method, Mol. Biol. Evol.14 (1997) 714–724.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Supported by the New Zealand Marsden Fund.

Supported by the National Science Foundation grant DMS 9701211, and the Hungarian National Science Fund contract T 016 358.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Steel, M.A., Székely, L.A. Inverting random functions. Annals of Combinatorics 3, 103–113 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01609880

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01609880

AMS Subject Classification

Keywords

Navigation