MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Detecting high-scoring local alignments in pangenome graphs

2021· article· en· W3126228859 on OpenAlexafffund
Tizian Schulz, Roland Wittler, Sven Rahmann, Faraz Hach, Jens Stoye

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersGerman Network for Bioinformatics InfrastructureMichael Smith Health Research BCBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean CommissionCalifornia Department of Fish and Game
KeywordsDe Bruijn graphComputer scienceSpurious relationshipDe Bruijn sequenceGraphSequence (biology)Similarity (geometry)Theoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsCombinatoricsBiologyMachine learningGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: Increasing amounts of individual genomes sequenced per species motivate the usage of pangenomic approaches. Pangenomes may be represented as graphical structures, e.g. compacted colored de Bruijn graphs, which offer a low memory usage and facilitate reference-free sequence comparisons. While sequence-to-graph mapping to graphical pangenomes has been studied for some time, no local alignment search tool in the vein of BLAST has been proposed yet. RESULTS: We present a new heuristic method to find maximum scoring local alignments of a DNA query sequence to a pangenome represented as a compacted colored de Bruijn graph. Our approach additionally allows a comparison of similarity among sequences within the pangenome. We show that local alignment scores follow an exponential-tail distribution similar to BLAST scores, and we discuss how to estimate its parameters to separate local alignments representing sequence homology from spurious findings. An implementation of our method is presented, and its performance and usability are shown. Our approach scales sublinearly in running time and memory usage with respect to the number of genomes under consideration. This is an advantage over classical methods that do not make use of sequence similarity within the pangenome. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Source code and test data are available from https://gitlab.ub.uni-bielefeld.de/gi/plast. 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207