A technical guide to TRITEX, a computational pipeline for chromosome-scale sequence assembly of plant genomes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As complete and accurate genome sequences are becoming easier to obtain, more researchers wish to get one or more of them to support their research endeavors. Reliable and well-documented sequence assembly workflows find use in reference or pangenome projects. RESULTS: We describe modifications to the TRITEX genome assembly workflow motivated by the rise of fast and easy long-read contig assembly of inbred plant genomes and the routine deployment of the toolchains in pangenome projects. New features include the use as surrogates of or complements to dense genetic maps and the introduction of user-editable tables to make the curation of contig placements easier and more intuitive. CONCLUSION: Even maximally contiguous sequence assemblies of the telomere-to-telomere sort, and to a yet greater extent, the fragmented kind require validation, correction, and comparison to reference standards. As pangenomics is burgeoning, these tasks are bound to become more widespread and TRITEX is one tool to get them done. This technical guide is supported by a step-by-step computational tutorial accessible under https://tritexassembly.bitbucket.io/ . The TRITEX source code is hosted under this URL: https://bitbucket.org/tritexassembly .
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it