ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2016
Comment on: 'ERGC: an efficient referential genome compression algorithm'.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Vertical lossless genomic data compression tools for assembled genomes: A systematic literature review.PloS one · 2020Pooled it
- Reference-based genome compression using the longest matched substrings with parallelization consideration.BMC bioinformatics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
motivationData compression is crucial in effective handling of genomic data. Among several recently published algorithms, ERGC seems to be surprisingly good, easily beating all of the competitors.
resultsWe evaluated ERGC and the previously proposed algorithms GDC and iDoComp, which are the ones used in the original paper for comparison, on a wide data set including 12 assemblies of human genome (instead of only four of them in the original paper). ERGC wins only when one of the genomes (referential or target) contains mixed-cased letters (which is the case for only the two Korean genomes). In all other cases ERGC is on average an order of magnitude worse than GDC and iDoComp. CONTACT: sebastian.deorowicz@polsl.pl, iochoa@stanford.edu SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
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.