MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bioinformatics algorithm based on a parallel implementation of a machine learning approach using transducers

2012· article· en· W2095207794 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

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNational Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities
KeywordsComputer scienceSpeedupAlgorithmNormalization (sociology)ScalabilityParallel algorithmComputationSmith–Waterman algorithmTransducerSequence alignmentParallel computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Finite automata, in which each transition is augmented with an output label in addition to the familiar input label, are considered finite-state transducers. Transducers have been used to analyze some fundamental issues in bioinformatics. Weighted finite-state transducers have been proposed to pairwise alignments of DNA and protein sequences; as well as to develop kernels for computational biology. Machine learning algorithms for conditional transducers have been implemented and used for DNA sequence analysis. Transducer learning algorithms are based on conditional probability computation. It is calculated by using techniques, such as pair-database creation, normalization (with Maximum-Likelihood normalization) and parameters optimization (with Expectation-Maximization - EM). These techniques are intrinsically costly for computation, even worse when are applied to bioinformatics, because the databases sizes are large. In this work, we describe a parallel implementation of an algorithm to learn conditional transducers using these techniques. The algorithm is oriented to bioinformatics applications, such as alignments, phylogenetic trees, and other genome evolution studies. Indeed, several experiences were developed using the parallel and sequential algorithm on Westgrid (specifically, on the Breeze cluster). As results, we obtain that our parallel algorithm is scalable, because execution times are reduced considerably when the data size parameter is increased. Another experience is developed by changing precision parameter. In this case, we obtain smaller execution times using the parallel algorithm. Finally, number of threads used to execute the parallel algorithm on the Breezy cluster is changed. In this last experience, we obtain as result that speedup is considerably increased when more threads are used; however there is a convergence for number of threads equal to or greater than 16.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

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 communication0.0000.002
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.248 · 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