MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2180318265 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btv487

EPGA2: memory-efficient <i>de novo</i> assembler

2015· article· en· W2180318265 on OpenAlexaff
Junwei Luo, Jianxin Wang, Weilong Li, Zhen Zhang, Fang‐Xiang Wu, Min Li, Yi Pan

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersProgram for New Century Excellent Talents in UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceSequence assemblyPipeline (software)ContigDe Bruijn sequenceDe Bruijn graphConstruct (python library)ParallelsGenomeReference genomeGraphTheoretical computer scienceParallel computingProgramming languageBiologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: In genome assembly, as coverage of sequencing and genome size growing, most current softwares require a large memory for handling a great deal of sequence data. However, most researchers usually cannot meet the requirements of computing resources which prevent most current softwares from practical applications. RESULTS: In this article, we present an update algorithm called EPGA2, which applies some new modules and can bring about improved assembly results in small memory. For reducing peak memory in genome assembly, EPGA2 adopts memory-efficient DSK to count K-mers and revised BCALM to construct De Bruijn Graph. Moreover, EPGA2 parallels the step of Contigs Merging and adds Errors Correction in its pipeline. Our experiments demonstrate that all these changes in EPGA2 are more useful for genome assembly. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: EPGA2 is publicly available for download at https://github.com/bioinfomaticsCSU/EPGA2.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.493
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207