Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35578255›Full record

ArticleAlgorithms for molecular biology : AMB2022

Bi-alignments with affine gaps costs.

Peter F Stadler, Sebastian Will

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Algorithms for molecular biology : AMB, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. An ascomycete H4 variant with an unknown function.Royal Society open science · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Peter F StadlerBioinformatics Group, Department of Computer Science, and Interdisciplinary Center for Bioinformatics, Universität Leipzig, Härtelstraße 16-18, 04107, Leipzig, Germany. studla@bioinf.uni-leipzig.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5016-5191
Sebastian WillAMIBio, Laboratoire d'Informatique de l'École Polytechnique (LIX), Institute Polytechnique de Paris (IP Paris), Batiment Turing, 1 rue d'Estienne d'Orves, 91120, Palaiseau, France.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft SFB 1423 / 421152132
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCommonly, sequence and structure elements are assumed to evolve congruently, such that homologous sequence positions correspond to homologous structural features. Assuming congruent evolution, alignments based on sequence and structure similarity can therefore optimize both similarities at the same time in a single alignment. To model incongruent evolution, where sequence and structural features diverge positionally, we recently introduced bi-alignments. This generalization of sequence and structure-based alignments is best understood as alignments of two distinct pairwise alignments of the same entities: one modeling sequence similarity, the other structural similarity.

resultsOptimal bi-alignments with affine gap costs (or affine shift cost) for two constituent alignments can be computed exactly in quartic space and time. Even bi-alignments with affine shift and gap cost, as well as bi-alignment with sub-additive gap cost are optimized efficiently. Affine gap-cost bi-alignment of large proteins ([Formula: see text] aa) can be computed.

conclusionAffine cost bi-alignments are of practical interest to study shifts of protein sequences and protein structures relative to each other. AVAILABILITY: The affine cost bi-alignment algorithm has been implemented in Python 3 and Cython. It is available as free software from https://github.com/s-will/BiAlign/releases/tag/v0.3 and as bioconda package bialign.

Indexed as

Dynamic programmingMulti-tape formal grammarRecursionScoring functions

Identifiers

PMID35578255
PMCPMC9109335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.