SoniaT: Difference between revisions

From OpenWetWare
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 12: Line 12:


==Parsimony Continued==
==Parsimony Continued==
*Why parsimony? 
**that will become more clear later when we go over likelihood
**this algorithm is sometimes called "model-free" because the model is implicit
**we can suggest infinite alternative explanations involving increasing numbers of mutations but they become less and less plausible
*One '''not'''-optimal way to look for the most parsimonious tree: try all four possibilities at every node. But that would require looking at 4^n possibilities! Using recursion in this problem, we can avoid that.
=== Down-Pass  Algorithm===
=== Down-Pass  Algorithm===
*Formalizing the idea of what you did by intuition in HW1.


<blockquote><tt>
<blockquote><tt>
Line 26: Line 34:
</tt></blockquote>
</tt></blockquote>


*Why parsimony? 
**we will talk about this later when we go over likelihood
**this algorithm is sometimes called "model-free" because the model is implicit
**we can suggest infinite alternative explanations involving increasing numbers of mutations but they become less and less plausible


*One stupid way to look for the most parsimonious tree would be to try all four possibilities at every node, but that would require looking at 4^n




Line 38: Line 41:
*Consider different weights for different mutations:  P(transitions > P(transversions)
*Consider different weights for different mutations:  P(transitions > P(transversions)


#Lets say that the cost of no mutation is zero, so fill in the diagonal
#Lets say that the cost of no mutation is zero, so fill in the diagonal with zeros.
#Lets say we want the cost of a transversion to cost 2.5 times as much as a transversion
#Lets say we want the cost of a transversion to cost 2.5 times as much as a transversion
#On the leaves we want to do something different from the internal nodes, because we are 100% sure of what the sequence is; it's not a guess.
#On the leaves we want to do something different from the internal nodes, because we are 100% sure of what the sequence is; it's not a guess.
Line 45: Line 48:
#If we work down from leaves to root
#If we work down from leaves to root


:example tree: ((C,A),(C,(A,G))
        example tree: ((C,A),(C,(A,G))

Revision as of 08:31, 18 September 2006

I'm a second year student in Eric Alm's and Bruce Tidor's Labs.

This term (Fall06) I'm TA-ing the undergrad computational class 20.181.

Check out the new BE directory!


Temporary notes for 20.181, Lecture 4


Review of Homework #1

Parsimony Continued

  • Why parsimony?
    • that will become more clear later when we go over likelihood
    • this algorithm is sometimes called "model-free" because the model is implicit
    • we can suggest infinite alternative explanations involving increasing numbers of mutations but they become less and less plausible
  • One not-optimal way to look for the most parsimonious tree: try all four possibilities at every node. But that would require looking at 4^n possibilities! Using recursion in this problem, we can avoid that.

Down-Pass Algorithm

  • Formalizing the idea of what you did by intuition in HW1.

def downPass(tree): #pseudocode!

if tree is a leaf:
return seq
l = downPass(left child)
r = downPass(right child)
i= l <intersect> r
if i==None:
return l <union> r
return i



Sankoff Downpass Algorithm

  • Consider different weights for different mutations: P(transitions > P(transversions)
  1. Lets say that the cost of no mutation is zero, so fill in the diagonal with zeros.
  2. Lets say we want the cost of a transversion to cost 2.5 times as much as a transversion
  3. On the leaves we want to do something different from the internal nodes, because we are 100% sure of what the sequence is; it's not a guess.
    • Initialize tree; each leaf has a vector of length 4
    • put a score of zero for the letter that we KNOW it is, put a score of infinite for the other three.
  4. If we work down from leaves to root
        example tree: ((C,A),(C,(A,G))