RNASequel: accurate and repeat tolerant realignment of RNA-seq reads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RNA-seq is a key technology for understanding the biology of the cell because of its ability to profile transcriptional and post-transcriptional regulation at single nucleotide resolutions. Compared to DNA sequencing alignment algorithms, RNA-seq alignment algorithms have a diminished ability to accurately detect and map base pair substitutions, gaps, discordant pairs and repetitive regions. These shortcomings adversely affect experiments that require a high degree of accuracy, notably the ability to detect RNA editing. We have developed RNASequel, a software package that runs as a post-processing step in conjunction with an RNA-seq aligner and systematically corrects common alignment artifacts. Its key innovations are a two-pass splice junction alignment system that includes de novo splice junctions and the use of an empirically determined estimate of the fragment size distribution when resolving read pairs. We demonstrate that RNASequel produces improved alignments when used in conjunction with STAR or Tophat2 using two simulated datasets. We then show that RNASequel improves the identification of adenosine to inosine RNA editing sites on biological datasets. This software will be useful in applications requiring the accurate identification of variants in RNA sequencing data, the discovery of RNA editing sites and the analysis of alternative splicing.
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 | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.009 |
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".