MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2264816414 · doi:10.1002/9781119078845.ch25

A New Fast Method for Detecting and Validating Horizontal Gene Transfer Events Using Phylogenetic Trees and Aggregation Functions

2015· other· en· W2264816414 on OpenAlexaff
Dunarel Badescu, Nadia Tahiri, Vladimir Makarenkov

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHorizontal gene transferPhylogenetic treeMonte Carlo methodAlgorithmQuadratic equationBiologyData miningComputational biologyGeneComputer scienceGeneticsStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter presents a new algorithm, called horizontal gene transfer (HGT)-QFUNC, for detecting genomic regions that may be associated with complete HGT events, using phylogenetic trees and aggregation functions. It provides the details of the method for inferring complete HGT events. The chapter validates the obtained results with p-values calculated using a Monte Carlo approach. The advantage of the proposed algorithm is its quadratic time complexity on the number of considered species. The chapter then estimates the rates of complete HGT among prokaryotes comparing the results to the highly accurate, but much slower, HGT-Detection algorithm based on the calculation of bootstrap support of considered gene trees. It compares the results provided by HGT-QFUNC and HGT-Detection using simulated data, which will be representative of the prokaryotic landscape. The chapter finally shows that the proposed new functions and algorithm are capable of providing good detection rates for the highly probable HGT events.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies→French-language works237,207→