Assembling draft genomes using contiBAIT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY: Massively parallel sequencing is now widely used, but data interpretation is only as good as the reference assembly to which it is aligned. While the number of reference assemblies has rapidly expanded, most of these remain at intermediate stages of completion, either as scaffold builds, or as chromosome builds (consisting of correctly ordered, but not necessarily correctly oriented scaffolds separated by gaps). Completion of de novo assemblies remains difficult, as regions that are repetitive or hard to sequence prevent the accumulation of larger scaffolds, and create errors such as misorientations and mislocalizations. Thus, complementary methods for determining the orientation and positioning of fragments are important for finishing assemblies. Strand-seq is a method for determining template strand inheritance in single cells, information that can be used to determine relative genomic distance and orientation between scaffolds, and find errors within them. We present contiBAIT, an R/Bioconductor package which uses Strand-seq data to repair and improve existing assemblies. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: contiBAIT is available on Bioconductor. Source files available from GitHub. CONTACT: koneill@bcgsc.ca or mark.hills@stemcell.com. SUPPLEMENTARY 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 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 | 0.008 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.101 | 0.094 |
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".