Weighted genomic distance can hardly impose a bound on the proportion of transpositions
Shuai Jiang, Max A. Alekseyev

TL;DR
This paper demonstrates that weighted genomic distance models with weights between 1 and 2 cannot effectively limit the proportion of transpositions in genome rearrangement transformations, revealing limitations in current approaches.
Contribution
The authors prove that for weights in (1,2], minimum-weight transformations can be entirely composed of transpositions, challenging the effectiveness of weighted distances in bounding transpositions.
Findings
Weighted distance with α in (1,2] can be dominated by transpositions.
Minimum-weight transformations in this range do not depend on the specific α value.
Such transformations are shortest and minimize genome breakages.
Abstract
Genomic distance between two genomes, i.e., the smallest number of genome rearrangements required to transform one genome into the other, is often used as a measure of evolutionary closeness of the genomes in comparative genomics studies. However, in models that include rearrangements of significantly different "power" such as reversals (that are "weak" and most frequent rearrangements) and transpositions (that are more "powerful" but rare), the genomic distance typically corresponds to a transformation with a large proportion of transpositions, which is not biologically adequate. Weighted genomic distance is a traditional approach to bounding the proportion of transpositions by assigning them a relative weight {\alpha} > 1. A number of previous studies addressed the problem of computing weighted genomic distance with {\alpha} \leq 2. Employing the model of multi-break…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
