OrthoCluster
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By comparing genomes among both closely and distally related species, comparative genomics analysis characterizes structures and functions of different genomes in both conserved and divergent regions. Synteny blocks, which are conserved blocks of genes on chromosomes of related species, play important roles in comparative genomics analysis. Although a few tools have been designed to identify synteny blocks, most of them cannot handle some challenging application requirements, particularly the strandedness of genes, gene inversions, gene duplications, and comparison of more than two genomes. We developed a data mining tool, Ortho-Cluster, which can handle all those challenges. It is publicly available at http://genome.sfu.ca/projects/orthocluster. OrthoCluster takes the annotated gene sets of candidate genomes and pairwise orthologous relationships as input and efficiently identifies the complete set of synteny blocks. In addition, OrthoCluster identifies four types of genome rearrangement events namely inversion, transposition, insertion/deletion, and reciprocal translocation. To be fleexible in various application scenarios, OrthoCluster comes with a systematic set of parameters such as the synteny block size, number of mismatches allowed, whether the strandedness is enforced, whether gene ordering is preserved. Furthermore, OrthoCluster can be used to identify segmental duplication in a genome. In this paper, we introduce the major technical ideas, and present some interesting findings using OrthoCluster.
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.050 | 0.038 |
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".