MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2014145971 · doi:10.1109/icpp.2003.1240565

FastLSA: a fast, linear-space, parallel and sequential algorithm for sequence alignment

2003· article· en· W2014145971 on OpenAlexaff
Amy Driga, P. Lu, Jonathan Schaeffer, Duane Szafron, Kevin Charter, Ian Parsons

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlgorithmLinear spaceComputer scienceSmith–Waterman algorithmParallel computingSequence (biology)Parallel algorithmDynamic programmingPairwise comparisonMultiple sequence alignmentSpace (punctuation)Linear programmingSequence alignmentMathematicsDiscrete mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pairwise sequence alignment is a fundamental operation for homology search in bioinformatics. For two DNA or protein sequences of length m and n, full-matrix (FM), dynamic programming alignment algorithms such as Needleman-Wunsch and Smith-Waterman take O(m/spl times/n) time and use a possibly prohibitive O(/spl times/n) space. Hirschberg's algorithm reduces the space requirements to O(min(m,n)), but requires approximately twice the number of operations required by the FM algorithms. The fast linear space alignment (FastLSA) algorithm adapts to the amount of space available by trading space for operations. FastLSA can effectively adapt to use either linear or quadratic space, depending on the amount of available memory. Our experiments show that, in practice, due to memory caching effects, FastLSA is always as fast or faster than Hirschberg and the FM algorithms. We have also parallelized FastLSA using a simple but effective form of wavefront parallelism. Our experimental results show that Parallel FastLSA exhibits good speedups.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.005

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations18
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies→French-language works237,207→