ArticleThe protein journal2024
Choice of Metric Divergence in Genome Sequence Comparison.
Article in The protein journal, 2024. 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.
- Comprehensive Analysis of the GXXXG Motif Reveals Structural Context-Dependent Diversity and Composition Across Proteins.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The paper introduces a novel probability descriptor for genome sequence comparison, employing a generalized form of Jensen-Shannon divergence. This divergence metric stems from a one-parameter family, comprising fractions up to a maximum value of half. Utilizing this metric as a distance measure, a distance matrix is computed for the new probability descriptor, shaping Phylogenetic trees via the neighbor-joining method. Initial exploration involves setting the parameter at half for various species. Assessing the impact of parameter variation, trees drawn at different parameter values (half, one-fourth, one-eighth). However, measurement scales decrease with parameter value increments, with higher similarity accuracy corresponding to lower scale values. Ultimately, the highest accuracy aligns with the maximum parameter value of half. Comparative analyses against previous methods, evaluating via Symmetric Distance (SD) values and rationalized perception, consistently favor the present approach's results. Notably, outcomes at the maximum parameter value exhibit the most accuracy, validating the method's efficacy against earlier approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38492188What 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.