Spaced Seed Data Structures for<i>De Novo</i>Assembly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
De novo assembly of the genome of a species is essential in the absence of a reference genome sequence. Many scalable assembly algorithms use the de Bruijn graph (DBG) paradigm to reconstruct genomes, where a table of subsequences of a certain length is derived from the reads, and their overlaps are analyzed to assemble sequences. Despite longer subsequences unlocking longer genomic features for assembly, associated increase in compute resources limits the practicability of DBG over other assembly archetypes already designed for longer reads. Here, we revisit the DBG paradigm to adapt it to the changing sequencing technology landscape and introduce three data structure designs for spaced seeds in the form of paired subsequences. These data structures address memory and run time constraints imposed by longer reads. We observe that when a fixed distance separates seed pairs, it provides increased sequence specificity with increased gap length. Further, we note that Bloom filters would be suitable to implicitly store spaced seeds and be tolerant to sequencing errors. Building on this concept, we describe a data structure for tracking the frequencies of observed spaced seeds. These data structure designs will have applications in genome, transcriptome and metagenome assemblies, and read error correction.
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 | 0.001 | 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".