↓ Skip to main content

Solving the master equation for Indels

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Solving the master equation for Indels
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12859-017-1665-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ian H. Holmes

Abstract

Despite the long-anticipated possibility of putting sequence alignment on the same footing as statistical phylogenetics, theorists have struggled to develop time-dependent evolutionary models for indels that are as tractable as the analogous models for substitution events. This paper discusses progress in the area of insertion-deletion models, in view of recent work by Ezawa (BMC Bioinformatics 17:304, 2016); (BMC Bioinformatics 17:397, 2016); (BMC Bioinformatics 17:457, 2016) on the calculation of time-dependent gap length distributions in pairwise alignments, and current approaches for extending these approaches from ancestor-descendant pairs to phylogenetic trees. While approximations that use finite-state machines (Pair HMMs and transducers) currently represent the most practical approach to problems such as sequence alignment and phylogeny, more rigorous approaches that work directly with the matrix exponential of the underlying continuous-time Markov chain also show promise, especially in view of recent advances.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 12%
Student > Master 3 9%
Other 2 6%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 4 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 41%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 26%
Computer Science 4 12%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 May 2017.
All research outputs
#7,318,295
of 23,801,098 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#2,752
of 7,445 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,705
of 311,505 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#39
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,801,098 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,445 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,505 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.