1990
DOI: 10.1007/bf02458580
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Minimum message length encoding and the comparison of macromolecules

Abstract: A comparison of inductive inference known as minimum message length encoding is applied to string comparison in molecular biology. The question of whether or not two strings are related and, if so, of how they are related and the problem of finding a good theory of string mutation are treated as inductive inference problems. The method allows the posterior odds-ratio of two string alignments or of two models of string mutation to be computed. The connection between models of mutation and existing string alignm… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

1991
1991
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this sense, our work falls into the same category with other attempts at the application of Minimal Length Encoding in molecular evolution (Cheeseman & Kanefsky, 1990;Allison & Yee, 1990) and molecular biology (Babcock, Olson, & Pedrault, 1990;Jiang & Li, 1991;Konagaya & Yamanishi, 1991;Reichert, Cohen, & Wong, 1973;Jimenez-Montano, 1984).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 73%
“…In this sense, our work falls into the same category with other attempts at the application of Minimal Length Encoding in molecular evolution (Cheeseman & Kanefsky, 1990;Allison & Yee, 1990) and molecular biology (Babcock, Olson, & Pedrault, 1990;Jiang & Li, 1991;Konagaya & Yamanishi, 1991;Reichert, Cohen, & Wong, 1973;Jimenez-Montano, 1984).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 73%
“…In case of alignments, the target sequence would have to be encoded using a set of edit operations. A minimal length encoding approach to sequence alignment has been discussed in Allison and Yee (1990).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…DNA is not very compressible in any case, it being very difficult to compress 'typical DNA' below 1.8 bits per character, if it makes sense to speak of typical DNA. Any savings in communication costs or disc space would therefore be small, the exception being if we had multiple similar sequences to deal with (Allison and Yee 1990). The trend in data-compression is to separate compression into prediction and coding: a predictor makes predictions to the (arithmetic) coder at the transmitter end and a similar predictor makes predictions to the decoder at the receiver end.…”
Section: Compressionmentioning
confidence: 99%