MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789181488

Correcting Ambiguous Base Labels in DNA Sequencing using Neural Networks and its Impact on DNA Barcoding Applications

2018· dissertation· en· W2789181488 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eddie Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Atrium (University of Guelph) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDNA barcodingDNA sequencingDNAComputational biologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceBiologyGeneticsEvolutionary biology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obtaining DNA sequences relies on software algorithms, sequencing technology, and human effort. Advancement in algorithms and technology improves the rate in obtaining sequences. In this thesis, an artificial neural network based method improves the number of bases obtained from Sanger sequencing, by post-processing DNA sequences and replacing ambiguous N-labels with DNA base labels. The existing KB basecalling algorithm produces the initial sequence that is post-processed by the presented method. DNA Barcoding is a platform that depends on highly accurate sequences. In DNA Barcoding, species are identified by short reads of a standardized gene region (e.g. 600-700 bases for COI). Barcode of Life Datasystems (BOLD) is the largest repository and analytics platform serving the International Barcode of Life (iBOL) project. In this thesis, a novel machine learned error correction system is developed, the System-3 N-label Editor (S3). S3 is developed and validated on DNA Barcoding data, using 850,000 ambiguous base labels across 160,000 sequences. S3 internally represents uncertainty to estimate error and commits an N-label replacement when predicted error is sufficiently low. S3 maintains an observed error rate lower than 1%, while disambiguating 79% of N-labels in animal barcodes, 80% of N-labels from plant barcodes, and 58% of N-labels in non- protein-coding markers. S3 is tested for its impact in bioinformatics applications on 90,000 sequences from Canadian National Parks Malaise Project. Bioinformatics analyses are run using the KB, S3, and BOLD sequences as three treatment groups. Three applications are used for the comparison: Barcode Gap, Species Identification and Discovery, and Tree Building. The barcode gap refers to the difference in the between-and-within species distances; S3 improves the difference in two-thirds of species as compared with KB. For species identification/discovery, S3 did not improve over KB in resolving species. When phylogenetic trees are constructed using an overlapping region between KB, S3, and BOLD sequences - S3 trees are significantly more similar to to BOLD trees. The success in N-label replacement performance validation of S3, and encouraging results in DNA Barcoding applications point the way to future works that work on modern sequencing technologies and cover other error correction modes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Atrium (University of Guelph)Same topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207