Closed LinguList closed 2 years ago
A similar analysis can be done with mutual coverage then.
Suspect NJ will struggle with these data...
Agree, but there's no systematic study investigating how much this would affect Bayesian analyses, or is there? But as we discussed elsewhere, this is probably better done in another context with a dedicated and small dataset for testing, so one can run sufficient analyses.
We have detected from #26 already that we have some cases of excess synonymy. It seems reasonable to repeat the tossing-coins analysis to see how much this influences the phylogenies (albeit that this check only looks at NJ trees).