MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040054936 · doi:10.1093/molbev/msaa159

Broccoli: Combining Phylogenetic and Network Analyses for Orthology Assignment

2020· article· en· W3040054936 on OpenAlexaff
Romain Derelle, Hervé Philippe, John K. Colbourne

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology and Evolution · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsBiologyPipeline (software)Phylogenetic treeBenchmark (surveying)Computational biologyScalabilityCluster analysisPhylogeneticsGeneGenomeComputer scienceGeneticsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Orthology assignment is a key step of comparative genomic studies, for which many bioinformatic tools have been developed. However, all gene clustering pipelines are based on the analysis of protein distances, which are subject to many artifacts. In this article, we introduce Broccoli, a user-friendly pipeline designed to infer, with high precision, orthologous groups, and pairs of proteins using a phylogeny-based approach. Briefly, Broccoli performs ultrafast phylogenetic analyses on most proteins and builds a network of orthologous relationships. Orthologous groups are then identified from the network using a parameter-free machine learning algorithm. Broccoli is also able to detect chimeric proteins resulting from gene-fusion events and to assign these proteins to the corresponding orthologous groups. Tested on two benchmark data sets, Broccoli outperforms current orthology pipelines. In addition, Broccoli is scalable, with runtimes similar to those of recent distance-based pipelines. Given its high level of performance and efficiency, this new pipeline represents a suitable choice for comparative genomic studies. Broccoli is freely available at https://github.com/rderelle/Broccoli.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.689
Threshold uncertainty score0.602

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations119
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology and EvolutionSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207