↓ Skip to main content

Monte Carlo Strategies for Selecting Parameter Values in Simulation Experiments

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Biology, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
45 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.
Article details
Title
Monte Carlo Strategies for Selecting Parameter Values in Simulation Experiments
Published in
Systematic Biology, May 2015
DOI 10.1093/sysbio/syv030
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Simulation Experiments are used widely throughout evolutionary biology and bioinformatics to compare models, promote methods, and test hypotheses. The biggest practical constraint on simulation experiments is the computational demand, particularly as the number of parameters increases. Given the extraordinary success of Monte Carlo methods for conducting inference in phylogenetics, and indeed throughout the sciences, we investigate ways that a Monte Carlo framework can be used to carry out simulation experiments more efficiently. The key idea is to sample parameter values for the experiments, rather than iterate through them exhaustively. Exhaustive analyses become completely infeasible when the number of parameters gets too large, whereas sampled approaches can fare better in higher dimensions. We illustrate the framework with applications to phylogenetics and genetic archaeology.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 3 7%
Unknown 42 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 18%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Unspecified 3 7%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 8 18%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 29%
Engineering 5 11%
Unspecified 3 7%
Environmental Science 3 7%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 4%
Other 10 22%
Unknown 9 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 03 July 2015.
All research outputs
#18,178,930
of 29,436,183 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Biology
#1,573
of 1,954 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,104
of 286,966 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Biology
#15
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,436,183 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,954 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 286,966 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.