Speed improvements of peptide–spectrum matching using Single‐Instruction Multiple‐Data instructions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peptide-spectrum matching is one of the most time-consuming portion of the database search method for assignment of tandem mass spectra to peptides. In this study, we develop a parallel algorithm for peptide-spectrum matching using Single-Instruction Multiple Data (SIMD) instructions. Unlike other parallel algorithms in peptide-spectrum matching, our algorithm parallelizes the computation of matches between a single spectrum and a given peptide sequence from the database. It also significantly reduces the number of comparison operations. Extra improvements are obtained by using SIMD instructions to avoid conditional branches and unnecessary memory access within the algorithm. The implementation of the developed algorithm is based on the Streaming SIMD Extensions technology that is embedded in most Intel microprocessors. Similar technology also exists in other modern microprocessors. A simulation shows that the developed algorithm achieves an 18-fold speedup over the previous version of Real-Time Peptide-Spectrum Matching algorithm [F. X. Wu et al., Rapid Commun. Mass Sepctrom. 2006, 20, 1199-1208]. Therefore, the developed algorithm can be employed to develop real-time control methods for MS/MS.
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 | 0.001 | 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".