MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129107669 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2008.4649419

An efficient algorithm for local sequence alignment

2008· article· en· W2129107669 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubstringSmith–Waterman algorithmPairwise comparisonAlgorithmComputer scienceMultiple sequence alignmentSequence (biology)Sensitivity (control systems)String searching algorithmSuffix treeMatching (statistics)Tree (set theory)Algorithm designPattern matchingSequence alignmentMathematicsData structureArtificial intelligenceCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DNA pairwise sequence alignment has been a subject of great interest in the past and still evokes large interest. Recent algorithms have either been slow and sensitive or fast and less sensitive. Here, we present a new algorithm which is fast and at the same time relatively sensitive. To increase the speed, we first build a suffix tree for both sequences and the alignment is triggered by the maximum matching substring. The algorithm employs mismatch seeds to increase both sensitivity and speed in the later stages. We tested our algorithm on randomly generated sequences of length up to 500 thousand and used Rosetta dataset to test the sensitivity of the algorithm.

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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.281
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

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAlgorithms and Data CompressionFrench-language works237,207