arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2611.02182

Pin and Replay, or Refuse: Conditional Exactness and Probabilistic Validation Across Reference Releases

Joshua Terranova·Jiapeng Zhang
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Biologists annotate genomes by searching proteins against reference databases such as Pfam, which publish new releases every few weeks to months. Each release forces a full re-search, though most of the database is unchanged: 86.6% of Pfam entries matched between releases 38.1 and 38.2 after excluding build metadata and comments. Reusing old results is hard because search programs are fixed binaries whose printed statistics depend on whole-database size. We present TARE (Tool Annotation Replay with Evidence), a wrapper that reruns an unmodified program only on entries that can matter, pinning the program's database-size setting to the new release so it prints the numbers a full run would print. TARE then tests the replay by adding back omitted entries and refuses with a failure status if any line changes, dumping a full stock body when the tool still runs. Two claims stay separate: conditional exactness under a stated contract (tested each update, not proved), and runtime assurance as probabilistic validation at a stated prevalence---not a guarantee against shipping incorrect output. In the all-record timing, TARE audits 299 records from all queries, so a hidden dependency affecting at least 1% of that population ships with probability at most 5% (valid oracle); rarer faults are outside that bound. On Pfam 38.1->38.2, TARE is 3.47x faster than a full rerun under that audit (median over 8 genomes after excluding 1 flagged genome; 95% CI 3.30-3.81). Historical candidate-population timings on the same nine genomes were 4.24x (Bernoulli; 95% CI 4.17-4.68) and 3.49x (bounded s=299; 95% CI 3.32-4.10). Cost of checking versus unchecked replay is 1.58x (C/B). Across 715,704 HMMER and Infernal output lines, none differed from a full run. TARE refused DIAMOND, whose first filter reads neighboring database bytes, and BLAST+, whose unpinned probe rows fit none of TARE's column rules.

Explore related subjects

q-bio.GN

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Joshua Terranova, Jiapeng Zhang. 2026-11-01. Pin and Replay, or Refuse: Conditional Exactness and Probabilistic Validation Across Reference Releases. https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.02182

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Panoramic modelling of single-cell transcriptomes at scale with CellNet

Comprehensively characterizing cellular landscapes to elucidate cell diversity is a central goal in biology. Recent advances in single-cell profiling have created unprecedented opportunities for this endeavor by capturing diverse transcriptomes with remarkable breadth. However, current foundation models generally struggle to leverage such holistic and valuable information to represent a cell. Here we present CellNet, which enables panoramic modelling of single-cell transcriptomes at scale by integrating DNA-derived gene identities and measured RNA expression into a shared image representation. Pretrained on 231 million image-based cell profiles across 40 species and covering over one million genes, CellNet improves the recognition of rare and condition-associated cellular states, enables the study of genes beyond experimentally measured panels, and uncovers associations between poorly characterized non-coding RNAs and known biological programmes. CellNet paves the way for AI-enabled cell-biology discovery at the whole-transcriptome scale. The CellNet website is available at https://www.cellnet.top.

q-bio.GN↗
arXiv2026

BEND 2.0: Benchmarking the Capabilities Needed to Design DNA

Genomic foundation models are increasingly used to propose DNA sequences and edits. But successful design requires capabilities that current benchmarks do not measure. Here we introduce BEND 2.0 (BENchmark for DNA language models), which tests how well models predict the effects of DNA changes and whether these predictions can guide sequence design. Across eight tasks built on five experimental datasets, we find that model choice and how representations are accessed both affect performance. Linear readouts fitted to frozen representations can match or exceed models' native outputs, and functional post-training substantially improves the models' capabilities. Linear readouts transfer well across experimental assays and genes, suggesting that models capture functional patterns beyond the data used to fit individual predictors. At the same time, strong prediction of average effects can conceal weaker prediction of context-specific effects, and accurate prediction of combined mutation effects does not imply accurate prediction of their interactions. In design tasks, model predictions can reduce the number of candidates needed to find a desired response, but still leave substantial room for better design choices, particularly for context-specific and multi-cell objectives. Our benchmark reveals that genomic models now display signs of general utility but have yet to saturate on performance in even simple tasks.

q-bio.GN↗
arXiv2026

Visualization and Characterization of Gene Group Distribution Patterns Across Genomes

Genes of the same family often lie close together on a chromosome, yet how far apart family members sit, and whether their spacing follows any pattern, has rarely been measured consistently across genomes. We built an interactive web application that places the members of any of the 1,396 FlyBase gene groups on the banded ideogram of the fruit fly (Drosophila melanogaster) and lists each member's neighbours. While browsing it, we found strikingly symmetric gene sets in which consecutive members are almost evenly spaced. In the RAB GTPases, two 5.08 Mb spacings differ by only 634 bp. We also found that distances between neighbouring members fall into two populations: short-range (median 1.8 kb) and long-range (median 2.4 Mb). Although an arm-matched random control suggests that the even spacing (without a minimum-distance filter) as well as the long-range population arise largely by chance, the short-range population turns out to be a genuine clustering signal. We then extended the analysis to human and six other model organisms (mouse, zebrafish, Caenorhabditis elegans, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Arabidopsis thaliana and maize), and every genome showed the same two populations. The mixture curve of the two is nearly constant across chromosomes in some genomes (Type I: fly, maize, Arabidopsis, C. elegans) but varies across chromosomes in others (Type II: human, mouse, zebrafish, yeast). Thus, across eight eukaryotes, family members lie in two distance populations. The scale of the short-range population follows the spacing of genes in each genome, and the long-range population matches random placement in fly and is consistent with it in the other genomes. Our results also show that visual patterns such as even spacing must be tested against chance before they are interpreted. Our tool and approach give a simple way to explore and compare gene clustering across species.

q-bio.GN↗