ON COMPARING TWO STRUCTURED RNA MULTIPLE ALIGNMENTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a method, called BlockMatch, for aligning two blocks, where a block is an RNA multiple sequence alignment with the consensus secondary structure of the alignment in Stockholm format. The method employs a quadratic-time dynamic programming algorithm for aligning columns and column pairs of the multiple alignments in the blocks. Unlike many other tools that can perform pairwise alignment of either single sequences or structures only, BlockMatch takes into account the characteristics of all the sequences in the blocks along with their consensus structures during the alignment process, thus being able to achieve a high-quality alignment result. We apply BlockMatch to phylogeny reconstruction on a set of 5S rRNA sequences taken from fifteen bacteria species. Experimental results showed that the phylogenetic tree generated by our method is more accurate than the tree constructed based on the widely used ClustalW tool. The BlockMatch algorithm is implemented into a web server, accessible at http://bioinformatics.njit.edu/blockmatch. A jar file of the program is also available for download from the web server.
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".