
pmid: 35120007
In this paper, we explore using the data-centric approach to tackle the Multiple Sequence Alignment (MSA) construction problem. Unlike the algorithm-centric approach, which reduces the construction problem to a combinatorial optimization problem based on an abstract mathematical model, the data-centric approach explores using classification models trained from existing benchmark data to guide the construction. We identified two simple classifications to help us choose a better alignment tool and determine whether and how much to carry out realignment. We show that shallow machine-learning algorithms suffice to train sensitive models for these classifications. Based on these models, we implemented a new multiple sequence alignment pipeline, called MLProbs. Compared with 10 other popular alignment tools over four benchmark databases (namely, BAliBASE, OXBench, OXBench-X and SABMark), MLProbs consistently gives the highest TC score. More importantly, MLProbs shows non-trivial improvement for protein families with low similarity; in particular, when evaluated against the 1,356 protein families with similarity ≤ 50%, MLProbs achieves a TC score of 56.93, while the next best three tools are in the range of [55.41, 55.91] (increased by more than 1.8%). We also compared the performance of MLProbs and other MSA tools in two real-life applications - Phylogenetic Tree Construction Analysis and Protein Secondary Structure Prediction - and MLProbs also had the best performance. In our study, we used only shallow machine-learning algorithms to train our models. It would be interesting to study whether deep-learning methods can help make further improvements, so we suggest some possible research directions in the conclusion section.
Computational Biology, Proteins, Sequence Alignment, Phylogeny, Algorithms, Software
Computational Biology, Proteins, Sequence Alignment, Phylogeny, Algorithms, Software
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 1 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
