MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2507770958 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btw400

LCA*: an entropy-based measure for taxonomic assignment within assembled metagenomes

2016· article· en· W2507770958 on OpenAlexaff
Niels W. Hanson, Kishori M. Konwar, Steven Hallam

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTaxonomic rankTaxonomy (biology)VotingPhylogenetic treeData miningInformation retrievalMachine learningBiologyEcologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: A perennial problem in the analysis of environmental sequence information is the assignment of reads or assembled sequences, e.g. contigs or scaffolds, to discrete taxonomic bins. In the absence of reference genomes for most environmental microorganisms, the use of intrinsic nucleotide patterns and phylogenetic anchors can improve assembly-dependent binning needed for more accurate taxonomic and functional annotation in communities of microorganisms, and assist in identifying mobile genetic elements or lateral gene transfer events. RESULTS: Here, we present a statistic called LCA* inspired by Information and Voting theories that uses the NCBI Taxonomic Database hierarchy to assign taxonomy to contigs assembled from environmental sequence information. The LCA* algorithm identifies a sufficiently strong majority on the hierarchy while minimizing entropy changes to the observed taxonomic distribution resulting in improved statistical properties. Moreover, we apply results from the order-statistic literature to formulate a likelihood-ratio hypothesis test and P-value for testing the supremacy of the assigned LCA* taxonomy. Using simulated and real-world datasets, we empirically demonstrate that voting-based methods, majority vote and LCA*, in the presence of known reference annotations, are consistently more accurate in identifying contig taxonomy than the lowest common ancestor algorithm popularized by MEGAN, and that LCA* taxonomy strikes a balance between specificity and confidence to provide an estimate appropriate to the available information in the data. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The LCA* has been implemented as a stand-alone Python library compatible with the MetaPathways pipeline; both of which are available on GitHub with installation instructions and use-cases (http://www.github.com/hallamlab/LCAStar/). CONTACT: shallam@mail.ubc.caSupplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations34
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207