SEQuel: improving the accuracy of genome assemblies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Assemblies of next-generation sequencing (NGS) data, although accurate, still contain a substantial number of errors that need to be corrected after the assembly process. We develop SEQuel, a tool that corrects errors (i.e. insertions, deletions and substitution errors) in the assembled contigs. Fundamental to the algorithm behind SEQuel is the positional de Bruijn graph, a graph structure that models k-mers within reads while incorporating the approximate positions of reads into the model. RESULTS: SEQuel reduced the number of small insertions and deletions in the assemblies of standard multi-cell Escherichia coli data by almost half, and corrected between 30% and 94% of the substitution errors. Further, we show SEQuel is imperative to improving single-cell assembly, which is inherently more challenging due to higher error rates and non-uniform coverage; over half of the small indels, and substitution errors in the single-cell assemblies were corrected. We apply SEQuel to the recently assembled Deltaproteobacterium SAR324 genome, which is the first bacterial genome with a comprehensive single-cell genome assembly, and make over 800 changes (insertions, deletions and substitutions) to refine this assembly. AVAILABILITY: SEQuel can be used as a post-processing step in combination with any NGS assembler and is freely available at http://bix.ucsd.edu/SEQuel/.
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 | 0.011 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.008 |
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".