A GRAPH-BASED ALGORITHM FOR MINING MULTI-LEVEL PATTERNS IN GENOMIC DATA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Comparative genomics is concerned with the study of genome structure and function of different species. It can provide useful information for the derivation of evolutionary and functional relationships between genomes. Previous work on genome comparison focuses mainly on comparing the entire genomes for visualization without further analysis. As many interesting patterns may exist between genomes and may lead to the discovering of functional gene segments (groups of genes), we propose an algorithm called Multi-Level Genome Comparison Algorithm (MGC) that can be used to facilitate the analysis of genomes at multi-levels during the comparison process to discover sequential and regional consistency in gene segments. Different genomes may have common sub-sequences that differ from each other due to mutations, lateral gene transfers, gene rearrangements, etc., and these sub-sequences are usually not easily identified. Not all the genes can have a perfect one-to-one matching with each other. It is quite possible for one-to-many or many-to-many ambiguous relationships to exist between them. To perform the tasks effectively, MGC takes such ambiguity into consideration during genome comparison by representing genomes in a graph and then make use of a graph mining algorithm called the Multi-Level Attributed Graph Mining Algorithm (MAGMA) to build a hierarchical multi-level graph structure to facilitate genome comparison. To determine the effectiveness of these proposed algorithms, experiments were performed using intra- and inter-species of Microbial genomes. The results show that the proposed algorithms are able to discover multiple level matching patterns that show the similarities and dissimilarities among different genomes, in addition to confirming the specific role of the genes in the genomes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".