MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072234624 · doi:10.1109/isit.2013.6620505

Optimal DNA shotgun sequencing: Noisy reads are as good as noiseless reads

2013· preprint· en· W2072234624 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Seyed Abolfazl Motahari, Kannan Ramchandran, David Tse, Nan Ma

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsShotgun sequencingDNA sequencingComputer scienceShotgunNoise (video)Sequence (biology)DNAChannel (broadcasting)AlgorithmComputational biologyBiologyGeneticsArtificial intelligenceComputer networkGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We establish the fundamental limits of DNA shotgun sequencing under noisy reads. We show a surprising result: for the i.i.d. DNA model, noisy reads are as good as noiseless reads, provided that the noise level is below a certain threshold which can be surprisingly high. As an example, for a uniformly distributed DNA sequence and a symmetric substitution noisy read channel, the threshold is as high as 19%.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.064
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.064
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.009
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations26
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAlgorithms and Data CompressionFrench-language works237,207