ArticleScientific reports2024
A generative adversarial network for multiple reads reconstruction in DNA storage.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Polus: a context-aware enhancement framework for DNA storage via transformer-based soft-decision decoding.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Comparison of state-of-the-art error-correction coding for sequence-based DNA data storage.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Efficient trace reconstruction in DNA storage systems using bidirectional beam search.iScience · 2025Article
- Predict the degree of secondary structures of the encoding sequences in DNA storage by deep learning model.Scientific reports · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
DNA storage is widely considered as a promising solution to the data explosion problem. However, the synthesis, PCR and sequencing processes usually result in erroneous reads involving base insertions, deletions, and substitutions. Specially this situation is even more serious in the 3rd generation of sequencing technologies. Different from previous error-correction and multiple sequence alignment methods, we first transform the multiple reads into a noisy mage, and then construct a conditional generative adversarial network to produce a "smooth" image which refers to the consensus sequence. Results on two real datasets demonstrate that our model can completely reconstruct the tested sequences with as high as 5.9% errors. This means that the proposed DNA-GAN can be applied on 3rd generation nanopore sequencing environments, while the transformer-based models are only tested on next-generation sequencing datasets. Furthermore, DNA-GAN exhibits excellent robustness even when as much as 20% of the clusters are contaminated with irrelevant reads. To the best of our knowledge, this work is the first to use GAN for multi-reads reconstruction in DNA-based storage.
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.