MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101251774 · doi:10.1109/tcbb.2007.70271

Assessing the Discordance of Multiple Sequence Alignments

2009· article· en· W2101251774 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Amol Prakash, Martin Tompa

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Human Genome Research InstituteUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsSequence alignmentComputational biologySequence (biology)Multiple sequence alignmentAlignment-free sequence analysisAnnotationComputer scienceComparative genomicsGenomicsBiologyGenomeBioinformaticsGeneticsGenePeptide sequence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiple sequence alignments have wide applicability in many areas of computational biology, including comparative genomics, functional annotation of proteins, gene finding, and modeling evolutionary processes. Because of the computational difficulty of multiple sequence alignment and the availability of numerous tools, it is critical to be able to assess the reliability of multiple alignments. We present a tool called StatSigMA to assess whether multiple alignments of nucleotide or amino acid sequences are contaminated with one or more unrelated sequences. There are numerous applications for which StatSigMA can be used. Two such applications are to distinguish homologous sequences from nonhomologous ones and to compare alignments produced by various multiple alignment tools. We present examples of both types of applications.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.388
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and BioinformaticsSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207