MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068896404 · doi:10.1109/tcbb.2007.1011

Perfect Sorting by Reversals Is Not Always Difficult

2007· article· en· W2068896404 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenome Rearrangement Algorithms
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSortingPairwise comparisonSimple (philosophy)ComputationClass (philosophy)Time complexityComputer scienceCombinatoricsPermutation (music)MathematicsAlgorithmDiscrete mathematicsTheoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose new algorithms for computing pairwise rearrangement scenarios that conserve the combinatorial structure of genomes. More precisely, we investigate the problem of sorting signed permutations by reversals without breaking common intervals. We describe a combinatorial framework for this problem that allows us to characterize classes of signed permutations for which one can compute, in polynomial time, a shortest reversal scenario that conserves all common intervals. In particular, we define a class of permutations for which this computation can be done in linear time with a very simple algorithm that does not rely on the classical Hannenhalli-Pevzner theory for sorting by reversals. We apply these methods to the computation of rearrangement scenarios between permutations obtained from 16 synteny blocks of the X chromosomes of the human, mouse, and rat.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.637
Threshold uncertainty score0.708

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.258 · 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