MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W161985688

Genome rearrangement and planning

2005· article· en· W161985688 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenome Rearrangement Algorithms
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenomeBiologyGene rearrangementGeneComputational biologyComputer scienceEvolutionary biologyGenetics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genome rearrangement problem is to find the most eco-nomical explanation for observed differences between the gene orders of two genomes. Such an explanation is pro-vided in terms of events that change the order of genes in a genome. We present a new approach to the genome re-arrangement problem, according to which this problem is viewed as the problem of planning rearrangement events that transform one genome to the other. This method differs from the existing ones in that we can put restrictions on the num-ber of events, specify the cost of events with functions, pos-sibly based on the length of the gene fragment involved, and add constraints controlling search. With this approach, we have described genome rearrangements in the action descrip-tion language ADL, and studied the evolution of Metazoan mitochondrial genomes and the evolution of Campanulaceae chloroplast genomes using the planner TLPLAN. We have ob-served that the phylogenies reconstructed using this approach conform with the most widely accepted ones.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGenome Rearrangement AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207