MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955890093 · doi:10.1080/03155986.2019.1629782

Multiobjective artificial fish swarm algorithm for multiple sequence alignment

2019· article· en· W2955890093 on OpenAlex
Ali Dabba, Abdelkamel Tari, Djaafar Zouache

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueINFOR Information Systems and Operational Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiple sequence alignmentAlgorithmSwarm behaviourAlignment-free sequence analysisSequence (biology)Benchmark (surveying)Computer scienceEvolutionary algorithmSequence alignmentSimilarity (geometry)Set (abstract data type)Function (biology)Artificial intelligenceBiologyImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiple sequence alignment (MSA) represents a basic task for many bioinformatics applications. MSA allows finding common conserved regions among various sequences of proteins or DNA. However, to find the optimal multiple sequence alignment, it is necessary to design an efficient exploration approach that could explore a huge number of possible multiple sequence alignments. As well as, it is required to use a powerful evaluation method to assess the biological relevance of these multiple sequence alignment. To address these main problems, this article presents a multiobjective artificial fish swarm algorithm (MOAFS) to solve multiple sequence alignment. MOAFS uses the behaviors of artificial fish swarm algorithm such as the cooperation, decentralization and parallelism to ensure a good trade-off between the exploration and the exploitation of the search space of MSA problem. To preserve the quality and consistency of alignment, two fitness functions have been simultaneously used by the MOAFS algorithm: (i) Weighted Sum of Pairs to determine similar regions horizontally and (ii) Similarity function to determine vertically similar regions between the sequences of an alignment. Following the exploration of space search, the Pareto-optimal set is obtained by MOAFS which performs the optimal multiple sequence alignments for both fitness functions. The performance of MOAFS algorithm has been proved by comparing our algorithm with different progressive alignment methods, and other alignment methods based on evolutionary algorithms with single-objective and many-objective. The experiment results conducted on BAliBASE 2.0 and BAliBASE 3.0 benchmark confirm that the MOAFS algorithm provides a greater accuracy statistical significance in terms of SP or CS scores.

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.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.797
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.283 · 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