ArticlePloS one2017
The effects of sampling on the efficiency and accuracy of k-mer indexes: Theoretical and empirical comparisons using the human genome.
Article in PloS one, 2017. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
One of the most common ways to search a sequence database for sequences that are similar to a query sequence is to use a k-mer index such as BLAST. A big problem with k-mer indexes is the space required to store the lists of all occurrences of all k-mers in the database. One method for reducing the space needed, and also query time, is sampling where only some k-mer occurrences are stored. Most previous work uses hard sampling, in which enough k-mer occurrences are retained so that all similar sequences are guaranteed to be found. In contrast, we study soft sampling, which further reduces the number of stored k-mer occurrences at a cost of decreasing query accuracy. We focus on finding highly similar local alignments (HSLA) over nucleotide sequences, an operation that is fundamental to biological applications such as cDNA sequence mapping. For our comparison, we use the NCBI BLAST tool with the human genome and human ESTs. When identifying HSLAs, we find that soft sampling significantly reduces both index size and query time with relatively small losses in query accuracy. For the human genome and HSLAs of length at least 100 bp, soft sampling reduces index size 4-10 times more than hard sampling and processes queries 2.3-6.8 times faster, while still achieving retention rates of at least 96.6%. When we apply soft sampling to the problem of mapping ESTs against the genome, we map more than 98% of ESTs perfectly while reducing the index size by a factor of 4 and query time by 23.3%. These results demonstrate that soft sampling is a simple but effective strategy for performing efficient searches for HSLAs. We also provide a new model for sampling with BLAST that predicts empirical retention rates with reasonable accuracy by modeling two key problem factors.
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.