Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

An Equivalence of Maximum Parsimony and Maximum Likelihood revisited

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "An Equivalence of Maximum Parsimony and Maximum Likelihood revisited"— Presentation transcript:

1 An Equivalence of Maximum Parsimony and Maximum Likelihood revisited
MIEP, 10 – 12 June 08, Montpellier An Equivalence of Maximum Parsimony and Maximum Likelihood revisited Mareike Fischer and Bhalchandra Thatte Mareike Fischer

2 The Problem Growing amount of DNA data
 stochastic models and methods needed for analysis! MP and ML are two of the most frequently discussed methods. MP and ML can perform differently (e.g. in the so-called ‘Felsenstein Zone’) But: When are MP and ML equivalent?  Approach by Tuffley & Steel Mareike Fischer

3 The Nr-Model Given: r character states c1,…,cr ;
No distinction between character states (fully symmetric model!); The probability pe of a transition on edge e is pe ≤ 1/r; Transition events on different edges are independent. Note: If r=4: Jukes-Cantor! Mareike Fischer

4 The Equivalence Result
Tuffley and Steel (1997): MP and ML with no common mechanism are equivalent in the sense that both choose the same tree(s). Note: ‘No common mechanism’ means that the transition probabilities can vary from site to site. Mareike Fischer

5 Linearity of the Likelihood Function
An extension gf of a character f agrees with f on the leaves, but also assigns character states to the ancestral nodes. Example: r=2, f=(c1,c1,c1,c2): c1 c2 8 different extensions! c2 c1 c1 c2 f: c c1 c c2 Mareike Fischer

6 Thus, P(f) is linear in each pe !
Linearity of the Likelihood Function Note that and u pe Thus, P(f) is linear in each pe ! c1 Mareike Fischer

7 Maximum of the Likelihood Function
Linear functions h: [0,t] kR are maximized at a corner of the box [0,t] k. Thus, we can assume wlog. that ML chooses a tree T with pe = 0 or 1/r for all edges e of T ! 1/r t t 1/r Mareike Fischer

8 Bound of the Likelihood Function
Let k be the number of ∞-edges. As before, we have Therefore, Note that P(gf)=0 if gf requires a substitution on an edge of length 0! For N = #{gf : P(gf)≠0} ML-Tree T Note that if P(gf)≠0 , then P(gf)=(1/r) k+1 ! And thus Mareike Fischer

9 So, for N = #{gf : P(gf)≠0} and k = #{∞-edges}, we have:
Bound for the Likelihood Function So, for N = #{gf : P(gf)≠0} and k = #{∞-edges}, we have: Wanted: Upper bound for N . Delete ∞-edges; k+1 connected components remain, M of them are labelled (i.e. contain at least one leaf) And: PS(f,T) ≤ M – 1 ck ck c1 ci k+1 components, M labelled Here: k =4. cj Mareike Fischer

10 Equivalence of MP and ML
Altogether: So we have: But obviously also as the most parsimonious extension of f requires exactly PS(f,T) changes. And thus In a sequence of ‘no common mechanism’, each likelihood can be maximized independently, and thus  Applied to one character f, MP and ML are equivalent! Mareike Fischer

11 Then, MP and ML are not equivalent!
Bounded edge lengths Modification of the model: Transition probabilities subject to upper bound u: 0 ≤ pe ≤ u < 1/r Then, MP and ML are not equivalent! Mareike Fischer

12 Example: Bounded edge lengths for r=2
Then, PS(f1|T1) = PS(f2|T2) = 1 Therefore, MP and ML are not equivalent in this setting! Also, P(f1|T1) = P(f2|T2),  MP is indecisive between T1 and T2 ! Note that by repeating f1 n times and f2 (n+c) times (c>0), a strong counterexample can be constructed! but max P(f2|T1) = 2u2(1-u)2 > u2 = max P(f1|T2)  ML favors T1 over T2 ! and PS(f1|T2) = PS(f2|T1) = 2 Mareike Fischer

13 Under a molecular clock, MP and ML are not equivalent!
Example: Here, pe = (1-Pe)/2. Under a molecular clock, MP and ML are not equivalent! Note that under a clock, the maximum of the likelihood can occur in the interior of the box [0,1/r]k ! The ‘height’ P of the tree is fixed: P=P1P2=P3P4P5 In this setting, MP is indecisive between T1 and T2 but ML favors T1. Mareike Fischer

14 Summary Even under the assumption of no common mechanism, MP and ML do not have to be equivalent! Small changes to the model assumptions suffice to achieve this. Mareike Fischer

15 Thanks…  … to my supervisor Mike Steel,
… to the organizers of this conference, … to the Allan Wilson Centre for financing my research, … to YOU for listening or at least waking up early enough to read this message . Mareike Fischer


Download ppt "An Equivalence of Maximum Parsimony and Maximum Likelihood revisited"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google