ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2024
Nanopore decoding with speed and versatility for data storage.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Polus: a context-aware enhancement framework for DNA storage via transformer-based soft-decision decoding.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- DNA Data Storage Architecture via Ligation of Dynamic DNA Bytes.Small methods · 2026Article
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
motivationAs nanopore technology reaches ever higher throughput and accuracy, it becomes an increasingly viable candidate for reading out DNA data storage. Nanopore sequencing offers considerable flexibility by allowing long reads, real-time signal analysis, and the ability to read both DNA and RNA. We need flexible and efficient designs that match nanopore's capabilities, but relatively few designs have been explored and many have significant inefficiency in read density, error rate, or compute time. To address these problems, we designed a new single-read per-strand decoder that achieves low byte error rates, offers high throughput, scales to long reads, and works well for both DNA and RNA molecules. We achieve these results through a novel soft decoding algorithm that can be effectively parallelized on a GPU. Our faster decoder allows us to study a wider range of system designs.
resultsWe demonstrate our approach on HEDGES, a state-of-the-art DNA-constrained convolutional code. We implement one hard decoder that runs serially and two soft decoders that run on GPUs. Our evaluation for each decoder is applied to the same population of nanopore reads collected from a synthesized library of strands. These same strands are synthesized with a T7 promoter to enable RNA transcription and decoding. Our results show that the hard decoder has a byte error rate over 25%, while the prior state of the art soft decoder can achieve error rates of 2.25%. However, that design also suffers a low throughput of 183 s/read. Our new Alignment Matrix Trellis soft decoder improves throughput by 257× with the trade-off of a higher byte error rate of 3.52% compared to the state of the art. Furthermore, we use the faster speed of our algorithm to explore more design options. We show that read densities of 0.33 bits/base can be achieved, which is 4× larger than prior MSA-based decoders. We also compare RNA to DNA, and find that RNA has 85% as many error-free reads when compared to DNA. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Source code for our soft decoder and data used to generate figures is available publicly in the Github repository https://github.com/dna-storage/hedges-soft-decoder (10.5281/zenodo.11454877). All raw FAST5/FASTQ data are available at 10.5281/zenodo.11985454 and 10.5281/zenodo.12014515.
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.