MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394688386 · doi:10.1186/s13015-024-00260-8

Pfp-fm: an accelerated FM-index

2024· article· en· W4394688386 on OpenAlexafffund
Aaron Hong, Marco Antônio Oliva, Dominik Köppl, Hideo Bannai, Christina Boucher, Travis Gagie

Bibliographic record

VenueAlgorithms for Molecular Biology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNational Human Genome Research InstituteJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDirectorate for Biological SciencesNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceParsingSuffixWord (group theory)SortingSearch engine indexingPrefixCharacter (mathematics)Suffix arrayIndex (typography)AlgorithmArtificial intelligenceNatural language processingData structureProgramming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract FM-indexes are crucial data structures in DNA alignment, but searching with them usually takes at least one random access per character in the query pattern. Ferragina and Fischer [1] observed in 2007 that word-based indexes often use fewer random accesses than character-based indexes, and thus support faster searches. Since DNA lacks natural word-boundaries, however, it is necessary to parse it somehow before applying word-based FM-indexing. In 2022, Deng et al. [2] proposed parsing genomic data by induced suffix sorting, and showed that the resulting word-based FM-indexes support faster counting queries than standard FM-indexes when patterns are a few thousand characters or longer. In this paper we show that using prefix-free parsing—which takes parameters that let us tune the average length of the phrases—instead of induced suffix sorting, gives a significant speedup for patterns of only a few hundred characters. We implement our method and demonstrate it is between 3 and 18 times faster than competing methods on queries to GRCh38, and is consistently faster on queries made to 25,000, 50,000 and 100,000 SARS-CoV-2 genomes. Hence, it seems our method accelerates the performance of count over all state-of-the-art methods with a moderate increase in the memory. The source code for $$\texttt {PFP-FM}$$ PFP - FM is available at https://github.com/AaronHong1024/afm .

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.009

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlgorithms for Molecular BiologySame topicAlgorithms and Data CompressionFrench-language works237,207