MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045408080 · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2020.101389

HASLR: Fast Hybrid Assembly of Long Reads

2020· article· en· W3045408080 on OpenAlexafffund
Ehsan Haghshenas, Hossein Asghari, Jens Stoye, Cédric Chauve, Faraz Hach

Bibliographic record

VenueiScience · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNanopore sequencingComputer scienceSequence assemblyContiguityDNA sequencingComputational biologyRange (aeronautics)BiologyEngineeringGeneticsDNAGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Third-generation sequencing technologies from companies such as Oxford Nanopore and Pacific Biosciences have paved the way for building more contiguous and potentially gap-free assemblies. The larger effective length of their reads has provided a means to overcome the challenges of short to mid-range repeats. Currently, accurate long read assemblers are computationally expensive, whereas faster methods are not as accurate. Moreover, despite recent advances in third-generation sequencing, researchers still tend to generate accurate short reads for many of the analysis tasks. Here, we present HASLR, a hybrid assembler that uses error-prone long reads together with high-quality short reads to efficiently generate accurate genome assemblies. Our experiments show that HASLR is not only the fastest assembler but also the one with the lowest number of misassemblies on most of the samples, while being on par with other assemblers in terms of contiguity and accuracy.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.008

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations68
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiScienceSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207