Pooled Genomic Indexing (PGI): Analysis and Design of Experiments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pooled Genomic Indexing (PGI) is a novel method for physical mapping of clones onto known sequences. PGI is carried out by pooling arrayed clones and generating shotgun sequence reads from the pools. The shotgun sequences are compared to a reference sequence. In the simplest case, clones are placed on an array and are pooled by rows and columns. If a shotgun sequence from a row pool and another shotgun sequence from a column pool match the reference sequence at a close distance, they are both assigned to the clone at the intersection of the two pools. Accordingly, the clone is mapped onto the region of the reference sequence between the two matches. A probabilistic model for PGI is developed, and several pooling designs are described and analyzed, including transversal designs and designs from linear codes. The probabilistic model and the pooling schemes are validated in simulated experiments where 625 rat bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) clones and 207 mouse BAC clones are mapped onto homologous human sequence.
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 | 0.052 | 0.095 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".