ArticleEvolutionary bioinformatics online2011
A monte carlo method for assessing the quality of duplication-aware alignment algorithms.
Article in Evolutionary bioinformatics online, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A lossy compression technique enabling duplication-aware sequence alignment.Evolutionary bioinformatics online · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The increasing availability of high throughput sequencing technologies poses several challenges concerning the analysis of genomic data. Within this context, duplication-aware sequence alignment taking into account complex mutation events is regarded as an important problem, particularly in light of recent evolutionary bioinformatics researches that highlighted the role of tandem duplications as one of the most important mutation events. Traditional sequence comparison algorithms do not take into account these events, resulting in poor alignments in terms of biological significance, mainly because of their assumption of statistical independence among contiguous residues. Several duplication-aware algorithms have been proposed in the last years which differ either for the type of duplications they consider or for the methods adopted to identify and compare them. However, there is no solution which clearly outperforms the others and no methods exist for assessing the reliability of the resulting alignments. This paper proposes a Monte Carlo method for assessing the quality of duplication-aware alignment algorithms and for driving the choice of the most appropriate alignment technique to be used in a specific context.The applicability and usefulness of the proposed approach are demonstrated on a case study, namely, the comparison of alignments based on edit distance with or without repeat masking.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.