4.8 Article

Accurate Model Selection of Relaxed Molecular Clocks in Bayesian Phylogenetics

期刊

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 30, 期 2, 页码 239-243

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/mss243

关键词

model comparison; marginal likelihood; Bayes factors; path sampling; stepping-stone sampling; model averaging; molecular clock; Bayesian inference; phylogeny; BEAST

资金

  1. European Union [278433-PREDEMICS]
  2. ERC [260864]
  3. National Evolutionary Synthesis Center (NESCent)
  4. NIH [R01 GM086887, HG006139]
  5. NSF [DMS0856099]
  6. Division Of Mathematical Sciences
  7. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [0856099] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent implementations of path sampling (PS) and stepping-stone sampling (SS) have been shown to outperform the harmonic mean estimator (HME) and a posterior simulation-based analog of Akaike's information criterion through Markov chain Monte Carlo (AICM), in Bayesian model selection of demographic and molecular clock models. Almost simultaneously, a Bayesian model averaging approach was developed that avoids conditioning on a single model but averages over a set of relaxed clock models. This approach returns estimates of the posterior probability of each clock model through which one can estimate the Bayes factor in favor of the maximum a posteriori (MAP) clock model; however, this Bayes factor estimate may suffer when the posterior probability of the MAP model approaches 1. Here, we compare these two recent developments with the HME, stabilized/smoothed HME (sHME), and AICM, using both synthetic and empirical data. Our comparison shows reassuringly that MAP identification and its Bayes factor provide similar performance to PS and SS and that these approaches considerably outperform HME, sHME, and AICM in selecting the correct underlying clock model. We also illustrate the importance of using proper priors on a large set of empirical data sets.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据