Table 3. Comparison of the three approaches using S = (V, H), ε = 2.
|
Rejection*
|
Estimated likelihood†
|
No likelihood‡
|
---|---|---|---|
Acceptance rate | 0.0008% | 16.9% | 0.2% |
TMRCA T | |||
1st quartile | 0.51 | 0.50 | 0.54 |
Mean | 0.69 | 0.67 | 0.70 |
Median | 0.64 | 0.63 | 0.66 |
3rd quartile | 0.81 | 0.80 | 0.81 |
Mutation rate θ | |||
1st quartile | 0.024 | 0.025 | 0.024 |
Mean | 0.029 | 0.031 | 0.029 |
Median | 0.028 | 0.030 | 0.028 |
3rd quartile | 0.033 | 0.035 | 0.033 |
Algorithm D; based on 1,000 observations. Estimated SEM of T = 0.01.
Based on likelihoods estimated from B = 200 simulations; 1,000 observations after sampling every 100 steps. Estimated SEM of T = 0.01.
Algorithm F; based on 1,000 observations after sampling every 50,000 steps. Estimated SEM of T = 0.01.