Archive for the ‘Compression’ Category

Kolmogorov Complexity – A Primer

Thursday, December 6th, 2012

Kolmogorov Complexity – A Primer by Jeremy Kun.

From the post:

Previously on this blog (quite a while ago), we’ve investigated some simple ideas of using randomness in artistic design (psychedelic art, and earlier randomized css designs), and measuring the complexity of such constructions. Here we intend to give a more thorough and rigorous introduction to the study of the complexity of strings. This naturally falls into the realm of computability theory and complexity theory, and so we refer the novice reader to our other primers on the subject (Determinism and Finite Automata, Turing Machines, and Complexity Classes; but Turing machines will be the most critical to this discussion).

Jeremy sets the groundwork necessary for a later post in this series. (covering machine learning)

Digest this for a couple of days and I will point out the second post.

Compressive Genomics [Compression as Merging]

Wednesday, July 11th, 2012

Compressive genomics by Po-Ru Loh, Michael Baym, and Bonnie Berger (Nature Biotechnology 30, 627–630 (2012) doi:10.1038/nbt.2241)

From the introduction:

In the past two decades, genomic sequencing capabilities have increased exponentially[cites omitted] outstripping advances in computing power[cites omitted]. Extracting new insights from the data sets currently being generated will require not only faster computers, but also smarter algorithms. However, most genomes currently sequenced are highly similar to ones already collected[cite omitted]; thus, the amount of new sequence information is growing much more slowly.

Here we show that this redundancy can be exploited by compressing sequence data in such a way as to allow direct computation on the compressed data using methods we term ‘compressive’ algorithms. This approach reduces the task of computing on many similar genomes to only slightly more than that of operating on just one. Moreover, its relative advantage over existing algorithms will grow with the accumulation of genomic data. We demonstrate this approach by implementing compressive versions of both the Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (BLAST)[cite omitted] and the BLAST-Like Alignment Tool (BLAT)[cite omitted], and we emphasize how compressive genomics will enable biologists to keep pace with current data.

Software available at: Compression-accelerated BLAST and BLAT.

A new line of attack on searching “big data.”

Making “big data” into “smaller data” and enabling analysis of it while still “smaller data.”

Enabling the searching of highly similar genomes by compression is a form of merging isn’t it? That is a sequence (read subject) that occurs multiple times over similar genomes is given a single representative, while preserving its relationship to all the individual genome instances.

What makes merger computationally tractable here and yet topic may systems, at least some of them, are reported to have scalability issues: Scalability of Topic Map Systems by Marcel Hoyer?

What other examples of computationally tractable merging would you suggest? Including different merging approaches/algorithms. Thinking it might be a useful paper/study to work from scalable merging examples towards less scalable ones. Perhaps to discover what choices have an impact on scalability.

Elegant exact string match using BWT

Thursday, May 17th, 2012

Elegant exact string match using BWT by Santhosh Kumar.

From the post:

This post describes an elegant and fast algorithm to perform exact string match. Why another string matching algorithm? To answer the question, let’s first understand the problem we are trying to solve.

In short, the problem is to match billions of short strings (about 50-100 characters long) to a text which is 3 billion characters long. The 3 billion character string (also called reference) is known ahead and is fixed (at least for a species). The shorter strings (also called reads) are generated as a result of an experiment. The problem arises due to the way the sequencing technology works, which in its current form, breaks the DNA into small fragments and ‘reads’ them. The information about where the fragments came from is lost and hence the need to ‘map’ them back to the reference sequence.

We need an algorithm that allows repeatedly searching on a text as fast as possible. We are allowed to perform some preprocessing on the text once if that will help us achieve this goal. BWT search is one such algorithm. It requires a one-time preprocessing of the reference to build an index, after which the query time is of the order of the length of the query (instead of the reference).

Burrows Wheeler transform is a reversible string transformation that has been widely used in data compression. However the application of BWT to perform string matching was discovered fairly recently in this paper. This technique is the topic of this post. Before we get to the searching application, a little background on how BWT is constructed and some properties of BWT.

Complete with careful illustrations of the operation of the Burrows Wheeler transform (BWT).

A separate post to follow details finding the BWT index of a long string efficiently.

Definitely a series to follow.

Large-scale compression of genomic sequence databases with the Burrows-Wheeler transform

Wednesday, May 2nd, 2012

Large-scale compression of genomic sequence databases with the Burrows-Wheeler transform by Anthony J. Cox, Markus J. Bauer, Tobias Jakobi, and Giovanna Rosone.

Abstract:

Motivation

The Burrows-Wheeler transform (BWT) is the foundation of many algorithms for compression and indexing of text data, but the cost of computing the BWT of very large string collections has prevented these techniques from being widely applied to the large sets of sequences often encountered as the outcome of DNA sequencing experiments. In previous work, we presented a novel algorithm that allows the BWT of human genome scale data to be computed on very moderate hardware, thus enabling us to investigate the BWT as a tool for the compression of such datasets.

Results

We first used simulated reads to explore the relationship between the level of compression and the error rate, the length of the reads and the level of sampling of the underlying genome and compare choices of second-stage compression algorithm.

We demonstrate that compression may be greatly improved by a particular reordering of the sequences in the collection and give a novel `implicit sorting’ strategy that enables these benefits to be realised without the overhead of sorting the reads. With these techniques, a 45x coverage of real human genome sequence data compresses losslessly to under 0.5 bits per base, allowing the 135.3Gbp of sequence to fit into only 8.2Gbytes of space (trimming a small proportion of low-quality bases from the reads improves the compression still further).

This is more than 4 times smaller than the size achieved by a standard BWT-based compressor (bzip2) on the untrimmed reads, but an important further advantage of our approach is that it facilitates the building of compressed full text indexes such as the FM-index on large-scale DNA sequence collections.

Important work for several reasons.

First, if the human genome is thought of as “big data,” it opens the possibility that compressed full text indexes can be build for other instances of “big data.”

Second, indexing is similar to topic mapping in the sense that pointers to information about a particular subject are gathered to a common location. Indexes often account for synonyms (see also) and distinguish the use of the same word for different subjects (polysemy).

Third, depending on the granularity of tokenizing and indexing, index entries should be capable of recombination to create new index entries.

Source code for this approach:

Code to construct the BWT and SAP-array on large genomic data sets is part of the BEETL library, available as a github respository at git@github.com:BEETL/BEETL.git.

Comments?