Results

Team*		Method**		Data #1		Data #2		Data #3		Data #4***
Team Demokritos		n-gram clustering		64.4 %		79.3 %		66.4 %
Rudi Cilibrasi		CompLearn		52.7 %		81.5 %		70.6 %
-		Hierarchical clustering		-		72.6 %		60.2 %		-
-		RHM06		76.0 %		79.9 %		76.9 %		-
-		PAUP: Parsimony		74.4 %		77.8 %		74.5 %		-
-		PAUP: Neighbour Joining		64.4 %		81.5 %		76.2 %		-
-		PAUP: Least Squares		64.2 %		81.5 %		70.2 %		-
-		SplitsTree: NeighborNet		59.1 %		77.8 %		70.2 %		-
-		SplitsTree: SplitDecomposition		53.1 %		74.5 %		73.1 %		-
-		SplitsTree: ParsimonySplits		56.8 %		83.7 %		71.6 %		-

*) The entries below the horizontal line are added for comparison purposes by the organizers, and, therefore, not included in the competition.

**) RHM06 = (Roos, Heikkilä, Myllymäki, "A Compression-Based Method for Stemmatic Analysis", ECAI-06).
PAUP = PAUP* version 4.0b10 for Unix. Heuristic search.
SplitsTree = SplitsTree4 version 4.10, build 2, May 2008.

***) Data #4 is 'real' and no correct solution is known.

The winner in the primary ranking (Data #1) is Team Demokritos (click on the team title in the table for more information).

The secondary ranking is based on Data #3 and Data #4 for which the winner is Rudi Cilibrasi who's submission was the best for Data #3. Neither submission was "plausible and useful" for Data #4 (as judged by a domain expert, hence no points for anyone).