ArticleEntropy (Basel, Switzerland)2018
Comparison of Compression-Based Measures with Application to the Evolution of Primate Genomes.
Article in Entropy (Basel, Switzerland), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- FALCON2: compression-based metagenomic classification of ancient viruses.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- An evaluation of computational methods for reconstruction of human viral DNA genomes.GigaScience · 2026Article
- Article
- BiComp-DTA: Drug-target binding affinity prediction through complementary biological-related and compression-based featurization approach.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Visual Analysis of Research Paper Collections Using Normalized Relative Compression.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Metagenomic Composition Analysis of an Ancient Sequenced Polar Bear Jawbone from Svalbard.Genes · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
An efficient DNA compressor furnishes an approximation to measure and compare information quantities present in, between and across DNA sequences, regardless of the characteristics of the sources. In this paper, we compare directly two information measures, the Normalized Compression Distance (NCD) and the Normalized Relative Compression (NRC). These measures answer different questions; the NCD measures how similar both strings are (in terms of information content) and the NRC (which, in general, is nonsymmetric) indicates the fraction of one of them that cannot be constructed using information from the other one. This leads to the problem of finding out which measure (or question) is more suitable for the answer we need. For computing both, we use a state of the art DNA sequence compressor that we benchmark with some top compressors in different compression modes. Then, we apply the compressor on DNA sequences with different scales and natures, first using synthetic sequences and then on real DNA sequences. The last include mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), messenger RNA (mRNA) and genomic DNA (gDNA) of seven primates. We provide several insights into evolutionary acceleration rates at different scales, namely, the observation and confirmation across the whole genomes of a higher variation rate of the mtDNA relative to the gDNA. We also show the importance of relative compression for localizing similar information regions using mtDNA.
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.