ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2026
Toward the regularization of E value from BLAST similarity search into a dissimilarity measure as distance function, and the metrication of protein sequence space.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sequence matching algorithms such as BLAST and FASTA have been widely used in searching for evolutionary origin and biological functions of newly discovered nucleic acid and protein sequences. As parts of these search tools, alignment scores and E values are useful indicators of the quality of search results (and the relevance of the matches) from querying a database of annotated sequences, whereby a high alignment score (and inversely a low E value) reflects significant similarity between the query and the subject (target) sequences. For cross-comparison of results from sufficiently different queries, however, the interpretation of alignment score as a similarity measure and E value a dissimilarity measure becomes somewhat nuanced, and prompts herein a judicious distinction of different types of similarity. Via a simulated formulation, we show that an adjustment of E value to account for self-matching of query and subject sequences corrects for certain ostensibly anomalous similarity comparisons, resulting in "regularized" dissimilarity and similarity measures that would be more appropriate for cross-comparisons, as well as database applications, such as all-on-all sequence alignment or selection of diverse subsets. In actual practice, the "regularization" of E value dissimilarity improves clustering and subset selection. While both E value and the "regularized" E value share two of the four axiomatic properties of a metric space, positivity, and symmetry, the latter E value further becomes reflexive and meets the condition of triangle inequality, the remaining two axioms, thus itself an appropriate distance function for metricating protein sequence space.
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.