Back

Phylogenetic inference using Generative Adversarial Networks

Smith, M. L.; Hahn, M. W.

2022-12-09 evolutionary biology
10.1101/2022.12.09.519505 bioRxiv
Show abstract

MotivationThe application of machine learning approaches in phylogenetics has been impeded by the vast model space associated with inference. Supervised machine learning approaches require data from across this space to train models. Because of this, previous approaches have typically been limited to inferring relationships among unrooted quartets of taxa, where there are only three possible topologies. Here, we explore the potential of generative adversarial networks (GANs) to address this limitation. GANs consist of a generator and a discriminator: at each step, the generator aims to create data that is similar to real data, while the discriminator attempts to distinguish generated and real data. By using an evolutionary model as the generator, we use GANs to make evolutionary inferences. Since a new model can be considered at each iteration, heuristic searches of complex model spaces are possible. Thus, GANs offer a potential solution to the challenges of applying machine learning in phylogenetics. ResultsWe developed phyloGAN, a GAN that infers phylogenetic relationships among species. phy-loGAN takes as input a concatenated alignment, or a set of gene alignments, and infers a phylogenetic tree either considering or ignoring gene tree heterogeneity. We explored the performance of phyloGAN for up to fifteen taxa in the concatenation case and six taxa when considering gene tree heterogeneity. Error rates are relatively low in these simple cases. However, run times are slow and performance metrics suggest issues during training. Future work should explore novel architectures that may result in more stable and efficient GANs for phylogenetics. AvailabilityphyloGAN is available on github: https://github.com/meganlsmith/phyloGAN/. Contactmls16@indiana.edu

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.