MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951332226 · doi:10.1089/cmb.2019.0309

Efficient Construction of a Complete Index for Pan-Genomics Read Alignment

2020· preprint· en· W2951332226 on OpenAlexaff
Alan Kuhnle, Taher Mun, Christina Boucher, Travis Gagie, Ben Langmead, Giovanni Manzini

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Biology · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institute of General Medical Sciences
KeywordsString (physics)Search engine indexingComputer scienceRank (graph theory)Sample (material)Suffix arrayCompressed suffix arrayIndex (typography)Data structureSuffixDatabase indexSpace (punctuation)Data miningString searching algorithmInformation retrievalMathematicsCombinatoricsWorld Wide WebProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Short-read aligners predominantly use the FM-index, which is easily able to index one or a few human genomes. However, it does not scale well to indexing collections of thousands of genomes. Driving this issue are the two chief components of the index: (1) a rank data structure over the Burrows–Wheeler Transform (BWT) of the string that will allow us to find the interval in the string's suffix array (SA), and (2) a sample of the SA that—when used with the rank data structure—allows us to access the SA. The rank data structure can be kept small even for large genomic databases, by run-length compressing the BWT, but until recently there was no means known to keep the SA sample small without greatly slowing down access to the SA. Now that (SODA 2018) has defined an SA sample that takes about the same space as the run-length compressed BWT, we have the design for efficient FM-indexes of genomic databases but are faced with the problem of building them. In 2018, we showed how to build the BWT of large genomic databases efficiently (WABI 2018), but the problem of building the sample efficiently was left open. We compare our approach to state-of-the-art methods for constructing the SA sample, and demonstrate that it is the fastest and most space-efficient method on highly repetitive genomic databases. Lastly, we apply our method for indexing partial and whole human genomes and show that it improves over the FM-index-based Bowtie method with respect to both memory and time and over the hybrid index-based CHIC method with respect to query time and memory required for indexing.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational BiologySame topicAlgorithms and Data CompressionFrench-language works237,207