Optimizing scoring function of dynamic programming of pairwise profile alignment using derivative free neural network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT A profile comparison method with position-specific scoring matrix (PSSM) is one of the most accurate alignment methods. Currently, cosine similarity and correlation coefficient are used as scoring functions of dynamic programming to calculate similarity between PSSMs. However, it is unclear that these functions are optimal for profile alignment methods. At least, by definition, these functions cannot capture non-linear relationships between profiles. Therefore, in this study, we attempted to discover a novel scoring function, which was more suitable for the profile comparison method than the existing ones. Firstly we implemented a new derivative free neural network by combining the conventional neural network with evolutionary strategy optimization method. Next, using the framework, the scoring function was optimized for aligning remote sequence pairs. Nepal, the pairwise profile aligner with the novel scoring function significantly improved both alignment sensitivity and precision, compared to aligners with the existing functions. Nepal improved alignment quality because of adaptation to remote sequence alignment and increasing the expressive power of similarity score. The novel scoring function can be realized using a simple matrix operation and easily incorporated into other aligners. With our scoring function, the performance of homology detection and/or multiple sequence alignment for remote homologous sequences would be further improved.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".