-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 57
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Flagged "out-of-model" leaves are not so bad #131
Comments
yes, this is not ideal. At first glance, this looks like a stupidity in the warning message to me. But I have to dig a little deeper. |
I really appreciate this, thank you. |
Maybe related to: #159 since rtt plot seems to show something else than "apparent date". Maybe it would help to make a separate rtt like plot but with "date vs apparent date" instead of "date vs root-to-tip-distance". If the closest relative is used to infer apparent date, then it could happen that if one has two nearly sequences with the same non-clock-like behaviour, each gets the "apparent date" from the other outlier. I don't know enough about the internals of treetime to know whether this is how it actually works but it could cause such confusions. |
this is due to leaves being initially flagged by simply excluding tips based on their deviation from the root to tip regression. Eventually, their position is estimated using phylogenetic information and then they sometimes end up being pretty ok. One could try to re-evaluate their exclusion, but this isn't currently on the roadmap. |
TreeTime flags leaves that do not conform to the clock model like so:
But in the above example, many "apparent date" estimates are spot on. Why does TreeTime flag them?
I am running v0.7.6
Thanks a lot!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: