Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1810.03766

Reference environments: A universal tool for reproducibility in computational biology

Daniel G. Hurley·Joseph Cursons·Matthew Faria·David M. Budden·Vijay Rajagopal·Edmund J. Crampin
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The drive for reproducibility in the computational sciences has provoked discussion and effort across a broad range of perspectives: technological, legislative/policy, education, and publishing. Discussion on these topics is not new, but the need to adopt standards for reproducibility of claims made based on computational results is now clear to researchers, publishers and policymakers alike. Many technologies exist to support and promote reproduction of computational results: containerisation tools like Docker, literate programming approaches such as Sweave, knitr, iPython or cloud environments like Amazon Web Services. But these technologies are tied to specific programming languages (e.g. Sweave/knitr to R; iPython to Python) or to platforms (e.g. Docker for 64-bit Linux environments only). To date, no single approach is able to span the broad range of technologies and platforms represented in computational biology and biotechnology. To enable reproducibility across computational biology, we demonstrate an approach and provide a set of tools that is suitable for all computational work and is not tied to a particular programming language or platform. We present published examples from a series of papers in different areas of computational biology, spanning the major languages and technologies in the field (Python/R/MATLAB/Fortran/C/Java). Our approach produces a transparent and flexible process for replication and recomputation of results. Ultimately, its most valuable aspect is the decoupling of methods in computational biology from their implementation. Separating the 'how' (method) of a publication from the 'where' (implementation) promotes genuinely open science and benefits the scientific community as a whole.

Explore related subjects

q-bio.QM

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Daniel G. Hurley, Joseph Cursons, Matthew Faria, David M. Budden, Vijay Rajagopal, Edmund J. Crampin. 2018-10-09. Reference environments: A universal tool for reproducibility in computational biology. https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.03766

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Lightning-fast adaptive immune receptor similarity search by symmetric deletion lookup

An individual's adaptive immune receptor (AIR) repertoire records immune history due to the receptors' antigen specificity. Reading this record requires computational approaches for inferring receptor function from sequence, as the diversity of possible receptor-antigen pairs vastly outstrips experimental knowledge. Identification of AIRs with similar sequence and thus putatively similar function is a common performance bottleneck in these approaches. Here, we benchmark the runtime scaling of five algorithmic approaches to radius-based search for Levenshtein neighbors. We show that a symmetric deletion lookup approach, originally proposed for spell-checking, is particularly scalable. We introduce SymScan and XTNeighbor, optimized CPU and GPU software implementing a parallelized variant of the algorithm. For one million input sequences, these tools identify all sequence pairs that differ by one or two edits in seconds, orders of magnitude faster than existing approaches. We demonstrate how symmetric deletion lookup can be integrated as a pre-filtering step in T cell receptor metaclone discovery and B cell receptor lineage identification. Our contribution is poised to greatly accelerate existing analysis pipelines and enable processing of immunosequencing data at scale.

q-bio.QM↗
arXiv2026

Implication of modelling choices on connectivity estimation: A comparative analysis

Landscape connectivity is an important field with important conservation implications. Connectivity modelling is a useful tool to inform and guide landscape planning. However, it involves assumptions and methodological decisions which ultimately impact connectivity outcomes. In order to understand the implications of modelling choices on final connectivity estimations, we compare two landscape characterisation approaches - expert knowledge and species distribution models - and three movements models - least-cost paths, circuit theory and an individual-based movement simulator. The implementation of the models and the construction of the analyses scope highlighted conceptual and methodological differences that made the comparison difficult. Landscape characterisation appears as the principal factor determining connectivity outcomes. Therefore, the confrontation between expert knowledge and species distribution models is critical to leverage points of convergence and complementarity between these two approaches. Conceptual differences between movement models are reported on connectivity map and habitat patch contribution estimations. In the want of data and protocol design specifically to validate connectivity models, approaches that integrate stochastic and behavioural processes, bring a more realistic perspective to connectivity estimation.

q-bio.QM↗
arXiv2026

Triplication: an important component of the modern scientific method

A scientific-study protocol (defined) is designed to deliver results from which inductive inference is allowed. In the nineteenth century, triplication was introduced into the plant sciences and Fisher's p<0.05 rule (1925) incorporated into triple-result protocols designed to counter random/systematic errors which contribute to real-world variability. The aims of the present study were to: (1) classify replication protocols; (2) assess their prevalence in plant-science studies (published during one twenty-first-century year; for defined variable construct); (3) explore triplication rationale. Methods: a plant-sciences protocol-prevalence report was produced; experimental/associational-study proportions analyzed; and real-world-data proxies used to show confidence-interval-width patterns with increasing replicate number. Results: 25% plant-science studies analyzed showed triplication, including 11% triple-result protocols (including greater replicate numbers: 48%;17%, respectively). Theoretical considerations indicated that even if systematic errors predominate, (previously-known) square-root rules sometimes apply, contributing to triplication importance (exemplified by real-world-data proxies). Conclusions: The defined protocols, with minor modifications, should provide the means for assessment of most sciences. Triplication was extensively applied in studies analysed and there are strong methodological reasons why triplication, rather than duplication/quadruplication, is the appropriate standard: triple-result protocols: (a) effectively reduce false positives to acceptable levels; (b) give qualitatively-different information (shape) from duplication; (c) have a large efficiency advantage (concerning confidence-interval widths) over quadruplication. The application of batch replication is not, primarily, a statistical problem and cannot effectively be replaced by simulation.

q-bio.QM↗