You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The one2all/new2all give this information about the intersection sizes with a new sample:
s1: 100/150
s2: 200/300
s3: 50/1000
...
Is there any way to get more detailed information showing common k-mers? For example, given these counts, I have no idea if the 50 k-mers seen in s3 are also present in s1 or s2.
The preferred output would be something like this:
s1: 50/50
s2: 200/300
s3: 0/900
s1 AND s3: 50/100
...
This can be achieved by creating all of the intersections beforehand, but looking at the kmer-db database structure, I was hoping to skip that step.
Regards,
Mihkel
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We can think of adding the functionality you mentioned to kmer-db. However, the number of all possible intersections grows exponentially with a number of queries. Wouldn't it be better to give user the possibility to explicitly state what intersections he is interested in?
The number of intersections does indeed grow fast.
Could the given intersections be limited by the number of k-mers shared by the references? For example, if s1, s2 and s3 share less than 1000 k-mers, the intersection would not be shown.
Also, showing intersections where something was actually found while searching, reduces the output size significantly.
Hi!
The one2all/new2all give this information about the intersection sizes with a new sample:
s1: 100/150
s2: 200/300
s3: 50/1000
...
Is there any way to get more detailed information showing common k-mers? For example, given these counts, I have no idea if the 50 k-mers seen in s3 are also present in s1 or s2.
The preferred output would be something like this:
s1: 50/50
s2: 200/300
s3: 0/900
s1 AND s3: 50/100
...
This can be achieved by creating all of the intersections beforehand, but looking at the kmer-db database structure, I was hoping to skip that step.
Regards,
Mihkel
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: