NBLAST: a cluster variant of BLAST for NxN comparisons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The BLAST algorithm compares biological sequences to one another in order to determine shared motifs and common ancestry. However, the comparison of all non-redundant (NR) sequences against all other NR sequences is a computationally intensive task. We developed NBLAST as a cluster computer implementation of the BLAST family of sequence comparison programs for the purpose of generating pre-computed BLAST alignments and neighbour lists of NR sequences. RESULTS: NBLAST performs the heuristic BLAST algorithm and generates an exhaustive database of alignments, but it only computes alignments (i.e. the upper triangle) of a possible N2 alignments, where N is the set of all sequences to be compared. A task-partitioning algorithm allows for cluster computing across all cluster nodes and the NBLAST master process produces a BLAST sequence alignment database and a list of sequence neighbours for each sequence record. The resulting sequence alignment and neighbour databases are used to serve the SeqHound query system through a C/C++ and PERL Application Programming Interface (API). CONCLUSIONS: NBLAST offers a local alternative to the NCBI's remote Entrez system for pre-computed BLAST alignments and neighbour queries. On our 216-processor 450 MHz PIII cluster, NBLAST requires ~24 hrs to compute neighbours for 850000 proteins currently in the non-redundant protein database.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.037 | 0.034 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".