In an alignment of sequences, conflict refers to the 'noise' in the data. These are when different sites each conform to different tree toplogies. Resolution happens when enough sites conform to the same topology to offset the noise in the data.

The problem comes if the data is so noisy that resolution is impossible. This amounts to insufficient data even if your sequences are very long. Resolution happens only when there are enough phylogenetically informative sites that support the same tree compared to the conflicting sites. This does not mean you have necessarily found the right tree as this also depends on your methodology and the proper model of sequence evolution to reduce systematic error)

An easy way to quantify the conflict versus support is to use network analysis and to do a Lento plot that shows how many sites conflict with your tree and how many support it. This is commonly called signal (systematic error) vs. noise (random error). Sorting out the two sources of error is essential to evaluate your resulting tree.

I believe phylogenetic Conflict in the tree is a method used to show the evolution of conflict graphically, from latent to manifest. Actually, it's a process, through which the dynamics of conflict can be analyzed and this can lead to a resolution or not.

In this perspective, conflict is perceived as an organism in continuous evolution. The understanding of the tree helps better located the conflict; because depending on how it evolves, it can switch from management to resolution (which could be referred to as solve or unsolve tree).

The analysis of conflict dynamics can help you better locate were to stand in the resolution process. In other words, the phylogenetic analysis will help you understand the root base of the conflict, hence you can evaluate according to its different ramifications if it can be resolved or not. And this helps you better locate the type of conflict you are dealing with: be it: Resolution, Management, Transformation, or completely not solvable.

Again, this entails drafting a correlation between the resolution measurement scale and the phylogenetic approach. this means, to which scale do or can we say a conflict is resolved?

Generally, resolution means the end of a problem; it means the problem will "never" resurface; or in very rare extreme circumstances can it resurface.

For example: lets us take a woman who has breast cancer, stage 1. Hopefully, she is diagnosed on time, and the Medical service tells her, that in other to solve her problem, she needs an operation. through which she will regain 100% of her health, without any risk of this problem resurfacing.

In this case, the operation is a definitive resolution method, through which the problem has been eliminated.

Therefore, operation can be taken as a measurement of the resolution scale process.

Furthermore, I think that in other to evaluate resolution and conflict phylogenetic analysis, you need to understand the different variants and variables in the phylogenetic analysis process. This said draft a resolution scale, from where you can establish dependent or independent variables and easily evaluate from that perspective if a conflict is solved or not.

I hope to have been of little help.

Kapleu

Your idea is interesting but is not what conflict and resolution is in Phylogenetic analysis.

Conflict is a contradiction of individual or collective ideological, intellectual, realistic and economic wills. If there are common denominators in a specific field, then it is possible to approach a solution to this conflict by employing diplomatic maneuvers, economic pressures, security alliances, etc. Otherwise, the available solution remains deterrence or war.

With great respect, believe that you, Dina, are confusing political conflict with the conflict (statistical) referred to in the original question