EXACT PARALLEL ALIGNMENT OF MEGABASE GENOMIC SEQUENCES WITH TUNABLE WORK DISTRIBUTION
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sequence Alignment is a basic operation in Bioinformatics that is performed thousands of times, on daily basis. The exact methods for pairwise alignment have quadratic time complexity. For this reason, heuristic methods such as BLAST are widely used. To obtain exact results faster, parallel strategies have been proposed but most of them fail to align huge biological sequences. This happens because not only the quadratic time must be considered but also the space should be reduced. In this paper, we evaluate the performance of Z-align, a parallel exact strategy that runs in user-restricted memory space. Also, we propose and evaluate a tunable work distribution mechanism. The results obtained in two clusters show that two sequences of size 24MBP (Mega Base Pairs) and 23MBP, respectively, were successfully aligned with Z-align. Also, in order to align two 3MBP sequences, a speedup of 34.35 was achieved for 64 processors. The evaluation of our work distribution mechanism shows that the execution times can be sensibly reduced when appropriate parameters are chosen. Finally, when comparing Z-align with BLAST, it is clear that, in many cases, Z-align is able to produce alignments with higher score.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it