Buffering Updates Enables Efficient Dynamic de Bruijn Graphs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Motivation The de Bruijn graph has become a ubiquitous graph model for biological data ever since its initial introduction in the late 1990s. It has been used for a variety of purposes including genome assembly (Zerbino and Birney, 2008; Bankevich et al., 2012; Peng et al., 2012), variant detection (Alipanahi et al., 2020b; Iqbal et al., 2012), and storage of assembled genomes (Chikhi et al., 2016). For this reason, there have been over a dozen methods for building and representing the de Bruijn graph and its variants in a space and time efficient manner. Results With the exception of a few data structures (Muggli et al., 2019; Holley and Melsted, 2020; Crawford et al., 2018), compressed and compact de Bruijn graphs do not allow for the graph to be efficiently updated, meaning that data can be be added or deleted. The most recent compressed dynamic de Bruijn graph (Alipanahi et al., 2020a), relies on dynamic bit vectors which are slow in theory and practice. To address this shortcoming, we present a compressed dynamic de Bruijn graph that removes the necessity of dynamic bit vectors by buffering data that should be added or removed from the graph. We implement our method, which we refer to as BufBOSS, and compare its performance to Bifrost, DynamicBOSS, and FDBG. Our experiments demonstrate that BufBOSS achieves attractive trade-offs compared to other tools in terms of time, memory and disk, and has the best deletion performance by an order of magnitude. Contact alanko.jarno@gmail.com
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".