MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficient algorithms for the discovery of DNA oligonucleotide barcodes from sequence databases

2009· article· en· W2012080711 on OpenAlexaff
Manuel Zahariev, Verónica Dahl, Wen Chen, C. André Lévesque

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Ecology Resources · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversitySimon Fraser UniversityAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyOligonucleotideSequence (biology)Computational biologySequence databaseDNA sequencingDNAGeneticsDatabaseComputer scienceGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Efficient design of barcode oligonucleotides can lead to significant cost reductions in the manufacturing of DNA arrays. Previous methods are based on either a preliminary alignment, which reduces their efficiency for intron-rich regions, or on a brute force approach, not feasible for large-scale problems or on data structures with very poor performance in the worst case. One of the algorithms we propose uses 'oligonucleotide sorting' for the discovery of oligonucleotide barcodes of given sizes, with good asymptotic performance. Specific barcode oligonucleotides with at least one base difference from other sequences in a database are found for each individual sequence. With another algorithm, specific oligonucleotides can also be found for groups or clades in the database, which have 100% homology for all oligonucleotide sequences within the group or clade while having differences with the rest of the data. By re-organizing the sequences/groups in the database, oligonucleotides for different hierarchical levels can be found. The oligonucleotides or polymorphism locations identified as species or clade specific by the new algorithm are refined and screened further for hybridization thermodynamic properties with third party software.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Ecology ResourcesSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207