Finding the Nearest Neighbors in Biological Databases Using Less Distance Computations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modern biological applications usually involve the similarity comparison between two objects, which is often computationally very expensive, such as whole genome pairwise alignment and protein 3D structure alignment. Nevertheless, being able to quickly identify the closest neighboring objects from very large databases for a newly obtained sequence or structure can provide timely hints to its functions and more. This paper presents a substantial speedup technique for the well-studied k-nearest neighbor (k-nn) search, based on novel concepts of virtual pivots and partial pivots, such that a significant number of the expensive distance computations can be avoided. The new method is able to dynamically locate virtual pivots, according to the query, with increasing pruning ability. Using the same or less amount of database preprocessing effort, the new method outperformed the second best method by using no more than 40 percent distance computations per query, on a database of 10,000 gene sequences, compared to several best known k-nn search methods including M-Tree, OMNI, SA-Tree, and LAESA. We demonstrated the use of this method on two biological sequence data sets, one of which is for HIV-1 viral strain computational genotyping.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".