Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multiple sequence alignment is a classical and challenging task. The problem is NP-hard. The full dynamic programming takes too much time. The progressive alignment heuristics adopted by most state-of-the-art works suffer from the "once a gap, always a gap" phenomenon. Is there a radically new way to do multiple sequence alignment? In this paper, we introduce a novel and orthogonal multiple sequence alignment method, using both multiple optimized spaced seeds and new algorithms to handle these seeds efficiently. Our new algorithm processes information of all sequences as a whole and tries to build the alignment vertically, avoiding problems caused by the popular progressive approaches. Because the optimized spaced seeds have proved significantly more sensitive than the consecutive k-mers, the new approach promises to be more accurate and reliable. To validate our new approach, we have implemented MANGO: Multiple Alignment with N Gapped Oligos. Experiments were carried out on large 16S RNA benchmarks, showing that MANGO compares favorably, in both accuracy and speed, against state-of-the-art multiple sequence alignment methods, including ClustalW 1.83, MUSCLE 3.6, MAFFT 5.861, ProbConsRNA 1.11, Dialign 2.2.1, DIALIGN-T 0.2.1, T-Coffee 4.85, POA 2.0, and Kalign 2.0. We have further demonstrated the scalability of MANGO on very large datasets of repeat elements. MANGO can be downloaded at http://www.bioinfo.org.cn/mango/ and is free for academic usage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".