MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890720538 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bty773

SCOP: a novel scaffolding algorithm based on contig classification and optimization

2018· article· en· W2890720538 on OpenAlexaff
Min Li, Li Tang, Fang‐Xiang Wu, Yi Pan, Jianxin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersHigher Education Discipline Innovation ProjectNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsContigComputer scienceScaffoldSpurious relationshipGraphSequence assemblyAlgorithmCuboidPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceTheoretical computer scienceGenomeMachine learningBiologyMathematicsGeneticsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: Scaffolding is an essential step during the de novo sequence assembly process to infer the direction and order relationships between the contigs and make the sequence assembly results more continuous and complete. However, scaffolding still faces the challenges of repetitive regions in genome, sequencing errors and uneven sequencing depth. Moreover, the accuracy of scaffolding greatly depends on the quality of contigs. Generally, the existing scaffolding methods construct a scaffold graph, and then optimize the graph by deleting spurious edges. Nevertheless, due to the wrong joints between contigs, some correct edges connecting contigs may be deleted. RESULTS: In this study, we present a novel scaffolding method SCOP, which is the first method to classify the contigs and utilize the vertices and edges to optimize the scaffold graph. Specially, SCOP employs alignment features and GC-content of paired reads to evaluate the quality of contigs (vertices), and divide the contigs into three types (True, Uncertain and Misassembled), and then optimizes the scaffold graph based on the classification of contigs together with the alignment of edges. The experiment results on the datasets of GAGE-A and GAGE-B demonstrate that SCOP performs better than 12 other competing scaffolders. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: SCOP is publicly available for download at https://github.com/bioinfomaticsCSU/SCOP. 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207