Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Electrical networks and data analysis in phylogenetics

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A Kalmanson metric is the resistance distance of a connected circular electrical network exactly when the matrix Ω_D built from it lies in the nonnegative isotropic Grassmannian with Δ_{24...2n−2} nonzero.

desk verdict A genuinely new characterization of electrical Kalmanson metrics via the isotropic Grassmannian, but the sufficiency proof currently rests on an unpublished theorem from the same group. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.01383 v2 pith:G32GEVL7 submitted 2024-12-29 math.CO cs.ITmath-phmath.ITmath.MPq-bio.PE

V. Gorbounov , A. Kazakov This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.COcs.ITmath-phmath.ITmath.MPq-bio.PE MSC 14M1582B2005E1005C5005C1092D1594C1590C05
keywords electricalnetworksKalmansonmetricsresistancedistanceisotropicGrassmannianPlückercoordinatesphylogeneticcircularsplitsystemstotalpositivity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper characterizes exactly which Kalmanson metrics—distance functions on a finite set that satisfy special four-point inequalities with respect to a circular order—arise as effective resistance metrics of connected circular electrical networks. The main theorem states that a Kalmanson metric D is such a resistance metric if and only if the matrix Ω_D constructed from D by formula (3.3) defines a point in the totally nonnegative isotropic Grassmannian Gr≥0(n−1,2n) and the Plücker coordinate Δ_{24...2n−2} does not vanish. This recasts a computational question, checking many circular minors after inverting a matrix, into a direct positivity check on an explicitly constructed matrix. Because Kalmanson metrics are the distances realized by circular split networks used in phylogenetics, the result connects electrical-network reconstruction to phylogenetic network reconstruction and points toward cluster-algebra methods for data analysis.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the matrix Ω_D associated to a Kalmanson metric D by formula (3.3), assembled from the second differences m_{ij} = −1/2(d_{ij}+d_{i+1,j+1}−d_{i,j+1}−d_{i+1,j}), the same expression appearing in the Kenyon–Wilson duality between resistance and response. Its row space is an isotropic subspace of $R^{{2n}}$, so it defines a point of the totally nonnegative isotropic Grassmannian IG≥0(n−1,2n) inside Gr≥0(n−1,2n); the Plücker coordinates of this point encode the nonnegativity conditions that replace the circular-minor checks of the response matrix. The shift operator s, which moves columns cyclically, connects Ω_D to the standard Lam embedding form (2.1), turning resistance data into response data for the dual network. The theorem says electrical realizability is exactly nonnegativity of all Plücker coordinates plus one nonzero coordinate, Δ_{24...2n−2}, which detects a connected network.

What would settle it

Compute, for some Kalmanson metric D on n points, the matrix Ω_D and verify that all its Plücker coordinates are nonnegative and Δ_{24...2n−2} ≠ 0; then form M(D) from formula (3.11) and test whether its circular minors satisfy the sign conditions of Theorem 2.4. If the circular-minor test fails while the Plücker test passes, the paper's characterization is not sufficient.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is a Grassmannian criterion for electrical Kalmanson metrics. For any Kalmanson metric D on n points, define the matrix Ω_D using the second differences m_{ij} = −1/2(d_{ij}+d_{i+1,j+1}−d_{i,j+1}−d_{i+1,j}); the row space of this n×2n matrix is an isotropic subspace of $R^{{2n}}$, so it defines a point in the totally nonnegative isotropic Grassmannian. Theorem 3.19 asserts that D is the effective resistance matrix of a connected circular electrical network precisely when this point lies in Gr≥0(n−1,2n) and the Plücker coordinate Δ_{24...2n−2} does not vanish. Necessity follows from earlier work showing that Ω_R(E) gives the Lam embedding; sufficiency uses the shift operator to pass between the resistance form and the response form, together with the split decomposition of Kalmanson metrics. In addition, Theorem 3.20 gives an equivalent test using circular minors of the matrix M(D), and Section 4 provides an algorithm to reconstruct the minimal circular electrical network from a resistance matrix via the strand permutation.

Load-bearing premise

The proof that the positivity condition is sufficient relies on the assertion that a cyclic shift of the constructed matrix stays inside the nonnegative part of the Grassmannian; if that shift ever exits the nonnegative part, a metric passing the paper's test could still fail to be a resistance metric of any circular electrical network.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The electrical realizability of a Kalmanson metric can be decided by checking nonnegativity of the Plücker coordinates of Ω_D together with one nonzero coordinate, with no matrix inversion and no exhaustive circular-minor check.
  • When the metric is electrical, the weights in its circular split decomposition are exactly the negative off-diagonal entries of the response matrix of the dual network, so the dual response matrix encodes the whole metric.
  • Tree-realizable distance matrices, the classical phylogenetic tree metrics, are electrical Kalmanson metrics, and the reconstruction algorithm in Section 4 recovers a minimal circular electrical network from the resistance matrix; if that network is a tree, the tree is unique.
  • The same positivity test applies to cactus networks, giving a criterion for Kalmanson pseudometrics in the compactified setting described in Remark 3.21.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Read as a data-analysis recipe, the theorem suggests a workflow: reorder a dissimilarity matrix into Kalmanson form, test the Plücker positivity of Ω_D, and on success reconstruct a circular electrical network whose resistance distances reproduce the data; the paper sketches the reconstruction but not the full workflow.
  • Because Remark 3.22 exhibits non-planar networks whose resistance metrics are still Kalmanson, the Grassmannian condition likely characterizes a broader class than circular planar networks; deciding exactly which networks satisfy it is left open.
  • The square root of an electrical Kalmanson metric is L2-embeddable, so the Grassmannian inequalities may describe a subcone of the Kalmanson cone with a polyhedral or cluster-algebra structure; the paper does not develop this description.
  • One concrete testable gap is the shift-operator step: if the cyclic shift fails to preserve total nonnegativity for some n, the sufficiency direction of the theorem would need an additional hypothesis.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies Kalmanson metrics that arise as effective resistance matrices of connected circular planar electrical networks. It introduces, for a Kalmanson metric matrix D, a matrix Ω_D via formula (3.3), and the main result Theorem 3.19 asserts that D is an electrical Kalmanson metric if and only if Ω_D defines a point in the totally nonnegative Grassmannian Gr≥0(n−1,2n) with the Plücker coordinate Δ_{24...2n−2} nonzero. The proof uses the Lam embedding of the space of circular electrical networks, a shift operator, and a surjectivity statement (Theorem 2.8). The paper also characterizes electrical Kalmanson metrics in terms of circular minors of an associated response-type matrix (Theorem 3.20), derives the Kalmanson property from total nonnegativity, and proposes an algorithm for reconstructing minimal network topology from the resistance matrix using strand permutations.

Significance. If the main theorem is correct, it provides a clean, checkable criterion for whether a Kalmanson metric is the resistance metric of a circular planar electrical network: one only needs to verify nonnegativity of the Plücker coordinates of an explicitly constructed matrix, avoiding the pseudoinverse-based checks of earlier work. This connects Kalmanson metrics and phylogenetic split systems to totally nonnegative isotropic Grassmannians and suggests a route to cluster-algebra methods in phylogenetics. The paper also gives an explicit worked example and a reconstruction algorithm. The main limitation is that the sufficiency proof of Theorem 3.19 depends on Theorem 2.8, which is stated without proof and cited to an in-preparation paper, so the central result is not yet self-contained.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.3, Theorem 2.8] Theorem 2.8 is stated without proof and is cited to the in-preparation manuscript [6]. This theorem is load-bearing for the main result: in the sufficiency proof of Theorem 3.19, the existence of a connected electrical network E with response matrix M(D) is obtained by applying Theorem 2.8 to Ω_D s^{-1}. Because [6] is not available to readers, the main characterization is not verifiable from the paper alone. Please include a full proof of Theorem 2.8, or replace the citation with a published reference containing the proof.
  2. [§3.2, proof of Theorem 3.19] The sentence 'By direct computations we conclude that the matrix Ω_D s^{-1} has the form (2.1) and Δ_{13...2n−3}((Ω_D s^{-1})') ≠ 0' is a second load-bearing step and the computation is not shown. In addition, the assertion that the action of s preserves nonnegativity is attributed to [26] without checking the relevant sign. For k=n−1 the shift is a signed permutation with sign +1 on Plücker coordinates, so this concern is repairable, but the proof should spell out both the matrix identity and the Plücker-coordinate computation rather than leaving them as an unstated direct check.
  3. [§3.2, proof of Theorem 3.20] The proof of Theorem 3.20 refers twice to 'Theorem 3.3', but no such theorem is stated in the paper. The intended statement appears to be the displayed identity Ω_R(E)=Ω(E^*)s=Ω(E) from Section 3.1, or a combination of Theorems 3.7 and 3.8. As written, the chain Ω(E')s=Ω(E)=Ω_R(E) cannot be followed, and the proof of this companion characterization is incomplete. Please correct the cross-reference and expand the argument.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§2.1] Definition 2.1 contains a grammatical error: 'A electrical network' should be 'An electrical network'.
  2. [§2.1, Theorem 2.4] There is a typographical error in 'the set of response matrices of the the elements of E_n'; the duplicated 'the' should be removed.
  3. [§3.1] The displayed line 'Putting it together Ω_R(E) = Ω(E^*)s = Ω(E)' would benefit from a short proof or a precise pointer to [4, Theorem 5.6], since the notation shift s is used repeatedly in Section 3.
  4. [§3.2, Example 3.25] In the split decomposition displayed in Example 3.25, the term D_{S43} appears together with D_{S34}; since S34 and S43 denote the same unordered split, this seems to be a typo and the list of splits should be cleaned up.
  5. [§4, Theorem 4.6] The proof of Theorem 4.6 is a one-line reference to Proposition 5.17 of [25]. Since the reconstruction algorithm in Section 4 relies on this theorem, please state more explicitly how the parametrization in [25] yields g(E)+1=τ(E), even if the full proof remains in the cited paper.
  6. [General] There are several formatting issues in the LaTeX source, such as 'Pl¨ ucker' and broken math spacing around inequalities. These should be corrected in the final version.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 5.0 of 10

Main sufficiency proof delegates the decisive Gr≥0-to-network step to Theorem 2.8, an unproved in-preparation self-citation; not definitionally circular, but load-bearing on the authors' own unpublished work.

  1. self citation load bearing [Theorem 2.8 and proof of Theorem 3.19 (Section 3.2), reference [6]]
    "Theorem 2.8. [6] Let A = ( aij) be a matrix which satisfies the first three conditions of Theorem 2.4 and Ω(A) be a matrix constructed according to the formula (2.1). If Ω(A) defines a point in Gr≥0(n − 1, 2n) and the Pl¨ ucker coordinate ∆13...2n−3(Ω(A)) is not equal to zero, then there is a connected electrical network E ∈En such that A = MR(E). ... Using the surjectivity of Lam’s embedding (see Theorem 2.8) and Theorem 3.8, we obtain that both ΩD and ΩDs−1 are associated with connected networks."

    The 'if' direction of Theorem 3.19 is reduced at its critical point to Theorem 2.8: from the totally nonnegative point ΩD s−1 the proof asserts the existence of a connected network with a prescribed response matrix. Theorem 2.8 is not proved here and is credited to [6], listed in the references as 'in preparation' and sharing author Kazakov with the present paper. The rest of the sufficiency proof only matches the Kalmanson split weights of D to those of the resistance metric R; it does not establish the existence of the network. Thus the main characterization rests on a same-group unpublished citation rather than on a self-contained derivation or an independently verifiable theorem, which is a load-bearing self-citation chain.

full rationale

Most of the architecture is non-circular: the map D ↦ Ω_D is explicit, the Grassmannian condition is a concrete Plücker-positivity check, and the split-decomposition step uses external uniqueness theorems (Bandelt–Dress, Kenyon–Wilson). There is no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction and no conclusion built into a definition. The serious issue is Theorem 3.19's sufficiency proof, whose pivotal step—turning the nonnegativity of Ω_D s−1 into an existing connected electrical network—is exactly the unproved Theorem 2.8, cited to an in-preparation paper by overlapping authors. After that bridge, the proof is a routine Kalmanson split-weight identification. Because Lam's theorem [25] and the published Theorem 3.8 [4] provide much of the surrounding equivalence, the paper is not a definitional tautology; however, the central claim is partly supported by a load-bearing self-citation that is not independently available to the reader. Score 5 reflects a genuine load-bearing self-citation gap rather than a full equation-level circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on external structural theorems (Lam embedding, Kenyon-Wilson duality, split decomposition) rather than new axioms. The most fragile imported assumption is the nonnegativity preservation under the shift operator, cited without proof.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Curtis-Ingerman-Morrow characterization of response matrices of circular planar networks (Theorem 2.4).
    Used to identify response matrices and to state the rank condition.
  • domain assumption Lam's bijection En ≅ Gr≥0(n-1,2n) ∩ PH (Theorem 2.7) and its surjectivity (Theorem 2.8).
    Central to the proof: the sufficiency direction needs surjectivity of the Lam embedding.
  • domain assumption Kenyon-Wilson duality formulas (Theorem 3.7).
    Connects response matrix of dual network to resistance matrix; used to prove the iff.
  • domain assumption Shift operator s preserves total nonnegativity of the Isotropic Grassmannian (cited to [26]).
    Needed in the proof of Theorem 3.19 to move between Ω_D and Ω_D s^{-1}.
  • domain assumption Split decomposition theorem for Kalmanson metrics (Theorems 3.14, 3.16).
    Gives the weights ω_ij and uniqueness of the weighted circular split system.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Electrical networks and data analysis in phylogenetics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/G32GEVL7

@misc{pith2026250101383,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Electrical networks and data analysis in phylogenetics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/G32GEVL7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.01383}
}
abstract

A classic problem in data analysis is studying the systems of subsets defined by either a similarity or a dissimilarity function on $X$ which is either observed directly or derived from a data set. For an electrical network there are two functions on the set of the nodes defined by the resistance matrix and the response matrix either of which defines the network completely. We argue that these functions should be viewed as a similarity and a dissimilarity function on the set of the nodes moreover they are related via the covariance mapping also known as the Farris transform or the Gromov product. We will explore the properties of electrical networks from this point of view. It has been known for a while that the resistance matrix defines a metric on the nodes of the electrical networks. Moreover for a circular electrical network this metric obeys the Kalmanson property as it was shown recently. We will call such a metric an electrical Kalmanson metric. The main results of this paper is a complete description of the electrical Kalmanson metrics in the set of all Kalmanson metrics in terms of the geometry of the positive Isotropic Grassmannian whose connection to the theory of electrical networks was discovered earlier. One important area of applications where Kalmanson metrics are actively used is the theory of phylogenetic networks which are a generalization of phylogenetic trees. Our results allow us to use in phylogenetics the powerful methods of reconstruction of the minimal graphs of electrical networks and possibly open the door into data analysis for the methods of the theory of cluster algebras.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.01383 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Electrical transformations Theorem 2.4. [9], [12] The set of response matrices of the the elements of En is precisely the set of the matrices M such that • M is a symmetric matrix; • All the non-diagonal entries of M are non-positive; • For each row the sum of all its entries is equal to 0. • For any k × k circular minor (−1)k det M(P; Q) ≥ 0. • The kernel of M is generated by the vector (1, 1, . . . , 1). Moreover,… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. A cactus electrical network with 4 nodes The electrical transformations can be applied to the cactus electrical net￾works. We denote by En the set of equivalence classes with respect to the electrical transformations of the cactus electrical networks with n nodes. The definition of a cactus network was introduced in [25] where it was proved that the set En is a compactification of En in the appropriate sense. Note t… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. 4-point Kalmanson property Remark 3.10. Note that the equations 3.6, 3.7 together are equivalent to the tropical inequality: Ri1i3 + Ri2i4 ≥ max(Ri2i3 + Ri1i4 , Ri1i2 + Ri3i4 ) Definition 3.11. Let X be a finite set and D is a metric on it. If there is a circular order on X such that the inequalities from the theorem above hold for any four points of X in this circular order, we call this metric the Kalmanson metric… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Circular split system and their polygon representa￾tions. Removing any set of parallel edges defines a split of the set of leaves of the graph on the right which coincides with the split of the set of the sides of a polygon on the left obtained by removing an appropria…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Labeling in the formula (3.10) Definition 3.18. Define a matrix M(D) M(D)ij =    X k̸=i ωik, if i = j, −ωij , if i ̸= j, (3.11) Notice that P k̸=i ωik = −ωii = dii+1. Given a Kalmanson metric as a matrix D, one can decide whether it is an electrical Kalmanson metr…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: A non-planar electrical network with nodes {1,. . . ,5} connected network E ∗ and M(D) = MR(E ∗ ). The properties of M(D) in the statement of the theorem follow from Theorem 2.4. □ A few remarks are in order. Remark 3.21. Many statements in this paper can be extended t…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: A tree network E and its dual network E ∗ , all the conductances are equal to 1 We will provide an example to illustrate the theorem above. Example 3.25. Let T be a tree with four leaves as in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Star-shape network, its median graph and the strand permutation τ (E) = (14)(36)(25) Theorem 4.5. [10] A circular electrical network is defined uniquely up to elec￾trical transformations by its strand permutation. Denote by Ai the columns of the matrix ΩR(E) and define…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: A lens obtained by the intersection of strands α1 and α2 Based on Theorem 4.6 we suggest the following reconstruction algorithm (see Example 4.11): • For a given matrix RE construct the matrix ΩR(E); • Using ΩR(E) calculate a strand permutation τ (E); • The permutation…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: On the left: A path which corresponds to a strand; On the right: the stands around a node of the degree 2 We propose the following algorithm for reconstruction of the minimal tree for a given tree metric DT based on Theorem 4.9: • Do all steps of the algorithm describ…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: An example of a reconstruction of a network topology [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Paths and Intersections: Minimum Realization of Okamura-Seymour Instances

    cs.DS 2026-07 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    Every OS metric has a unique minimum-crossing medial template; its primal arrangements are precisely the fewest-edge disk realizations, recoverable with realizing lengths in polynomial time.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [6]

    Bychkov, L

    B. Bychkov, L. Guterman, A. Kazakov, Electrical networks via circular minors, in preparation

    work page

  2. [25]

    Lam, Electroid varieties and a compactification of the space of electrical net- works, Adv

    T. Lam, Electroid varieties and a compactification of the space of electrical net- works, Adv. Math. 338, pp. 549–600 (2018)

    work page 2018

  3. [26]

    Lam, Totally nonnegative Grassmannian and Grassmann polytopes, arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.00603 (2015)

    T. Lam, Totally nonnegative Grassmannian and Grassmann polytopes, arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.00603 (2015)

    arXiv 2015

  4. [1]

    Bandelt and A

    H-J. Bandelt and A. Dress, Split decomposition: a new and useful approach to phylogenetic analysis of distance data, Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 1 (1992) 242–252

    work page 1992

  5. [2]

    Bandelt and A

    H-J. Bandelt and A. Dress, A canonical decomposition theory for metrics on a finite set, Advances in Mathematics Volume 92, Issue 1, March (1992) Pages 47-105

    work page 1992

  6. [3]

    Buneman, A note on the metric properties of trees

    P. Buneman, A note on the metric properties of trees. J. Combin. Theory Ser. B., Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 48-50 (1974)

    work page 1974

  7. [4]

    Bychkov, V

    B. Bychkov, V. Gorbounov, L. Guterman, A. Kazakov, Symplectic geometry of electrical networks, Journal of Geometry and Physics Volume 207, January 2025, 105323

    work page 2025

  8. [5]

    Bychkov, V

    B. Bychkov, V. Gorbounov, A. Kazakov, D. Talalaev, Electrical Networks, La- grangian Grassmannians, and Symplectic Groups, Moscow Mathematical Journal, Vol.23, No.2, pp.133-167 (2023)

    work page 2023

Show all 30 references
  1. [7]

    Chepuri, T

    S. Chepuri, T. George and D. E. Speyer, Electrical networks and Lagrangian Grass- mannians, https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.15418 (2021)

    2021 arXiv

  2. [8]

    J. C. Culberson, P. Rudnicki, A fast algorithm for constructing trees from distance matrices. Information Processing Letters, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 215-220 (1989)

    1989

  3. [9]

    E. B. Curtis, D. Ingerman, J. A. Morrow, Circular planar graphs and resistor net- works. Linear algebra and its applications, Vol.283, No. 1-3, pp.115-150 (1998)

    1998

  4. [10]

    Curtis, J

    B. Curtis, J. A. Morrow, Inverse problems for electrical networks. World Scientific. Vol.13 (2000)

    2000

  5. [11]

    M. Deza, M. Laurent, Geometry of Cuts and Metrics, Springer Berlin, DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04295-9

    doi

  6. [12]

    Colin de Verdi‘ere, Yves r´ eseaux ´ electriques planaires. I. Comment. Math. Helv. 69 (1994), no. 3, 351374

    1994

  7. [13]

    Devadoss, S

    S. Devadoss, S. Forcey, Compactifications of phylogenetic systems and electrical networks, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2408.03431

    doi arXiv

  8. [14]

    S. L. Devadoss, S. Petti, A space of phylogenetic networks. SIAM Journal on Applied Algebra and Geometry, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 683-705 (2017). ELECTRICAL NETWORKS AND DATA ANALYSIS IN PHYLOGENETICS 25

    2017

  9. [15]

    Forcey, Circular planar electrical networks, split systems, and phylogenetic net- works, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2108.00550

    S. Forcey, Circular planar electrical networks, split systems, and phylogenetic net- works, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2108.00550

    doi arXiv

  10. [16]

    Phylogenetic Networks as Circuits With Resistance Distance

    Forcey S, Scalzo D. Phylogenetic Networks as Circuits With Resistance Distance. Front Genet. 2020 Oct 15;11:586664. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2020.586664. PMID: 33193721; PMCID: PMC7593533

    2020

  11. [17]

    S. L. Hakimi, S. S. Yau, Distance matrix of a graph and its realizability. Quarterly of applied mathematics, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 305-317 (1965)

    1965

  12. [18]

    D. H. Huson, R. Rupp, C. Scornavacca, Phylogenetic networks: concepts, algo- rithms and applications. Cambridge University Press (2010)

    2010

  13. [19]

    A. A. Kazakov, Inverse problems related to electrical networks and the geometry of non-negative Grassmannians. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.16710. (2025)

    2025

  14. [20]

    Kirchhoff, On the solution of the equations obtained from the investigation of the linear distribution of galvanic currents

    G. Kirchhoff, On the solution of the equations obtained from the investigation of the linear distribution of galvanic currents. IRE Transactions on Circuit Theory, 5(1), 4-7 (1958)

    1958

  15. [21]

    R. W. Kenyon and D. B. Wilson, Boundary partitions in trees and dimers, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 363, pp. 1325–1364

  16. [22]

    Klein, M

    D.J. Klein, M. Randi´ c, Resistance distance. J Math Chem 12, 81–95, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01164627 (1993)

    1993 doi

  17. [23]

    Klein, H

    D. Klein, H. Zhu, Distances and volumina for graphs. Journal of Mathematical Chemistry 23, 179–195 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019108905697

    1998 doi

  18. [24]

    Kleinman, M

    A. Kleinman, M. Harel, L. Pachter, Affine and Projective Tree Metric Theorems. Ann. Comb. 17, 205–228 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00026-012-0173-2

    2013 doi

  19. [27]

    M. A. Steel, Phylogeny: Discrete and Random Processes in Evolution, 2016, https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:31002469

    2016

  20. [28]

    Speyer, B

    D. Speyer, B. Sturmfels, The tropical Grassmannian. Adv. Geom. 4 (2004), 389- 411

    2004

  21. [29]

    D. G. Wagner, Combinatorics of electrical networks, Lecture Notes, Dept. of C and O, University of Waterloo (2009)

    2009

  22. [30]

    Zelevinsky, ”What Is

    A. Zelevinsky, ”What Is . . . a Cluster Algebra?”, AMS Notices, 54 (11): 1494–1495, 2007. V. G.: F aculty of Mathematics, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Usacheva 6, 119048 Moscow, Russia Email address: vgorb10@gmail.com A. K.: Lomonosov Moscow State U...

    2007

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.