Cargando…

Improved profile HMM performance by assessment of critical algorithmic features in SAM and HMMER

BACKGROUND: Profile hidden Markov model (HMM) techniques are among the most powerful methods for protein homology detection. Yet, the critical features for successful modelling are not fully known. In the present work we approached this by using two of the most popular HMM packages: SAM and HMMER. T...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wistrand, Markus, Sonnhammer, Erik LL
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2005
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1097716/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15831105
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-6-99
_version_ 1782123909309530112
author Wistrand, Markus
Sonnhammer, Erik LL
author_facet Wistrand, Markus
Sonnhammer, Erik LL
author_sort Wistrand, Markus
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Profile hidden Markov model (HMM) techniques are among the most powerful methods for protein homology detection. Yet, the critical features for successful modelling are not fully known. In the present work we approached this by using two of the most popular HMM packages: SAM and HMMER. The programs' abilities to build models and score sequences were compared on a SCOP/Pfam based test set. The comparison was done separately for local and global HMM scoring. RESULTS: Using default settings, SAM was overall more sensitive. SAM's model estimation was superior, while HMMER's model scoring was more accurate. Critical features for model building were then analysed by comparing the two packages' algorithmic choices and parameters. The weighting between prior probabilities and multiple alignment counts held the primary explanation why SAM's model building was superior. Our analysis suggests that HMMER gives too much weight to the sequence counts. SAM's emission prior probabilities were also shown to be more sensitive. The relative sequence weighting schemes are different in the two packages but performed equivalently. CONCLUSION: SAM model estimation was more sensitive, while HMMER model scoring was more accurate. By combining the best algorithmic features from both packages the accuracy was substantially improved compared to their default performance.
format Text
id pubmed-1097716
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2005
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-10977162005-05-12 Improved profile HMM performance by assessment of critical algorithmic features in SAM and HMMER Wistrand, Markus Sonnhammer, Erik LL BMC Bioinformatics Research Article BACKGROUND: Profile hidden Markov model (HMM) techniques are among the most powerful methods for protein homology detection. Yet, the critical features for successful modelling are not fully known. In the present work we approached this by using two of the most popular HMM packages: SAM and HMMER. The programs' abilities to build models and score sequences were compared on a SCOP/Pfam based test set. The comparison was done separately for local and global HMM scoring. RESULTS: Using default settings, SAM was overall more sensitive. SAM's model estimation was superior, while HMMER's model scoring was more accurate. Critical features for model building were then analysed by comparing the two packages' algorithmic choices and parameters. The weighting between prior probabilities and multiple alignment counts held the primary explanation why SAM's model building was superior. Our analysis suggests that HMMER gives too much weight to the sequence counts. SAM's emission prior probabilities were also shown to be more sensitive. The relative sequence weighting schemes are different in the two packages but performed equivalently. CONCLUSION: SAM model estimation was more sensitive, while HMMER model scoring was more accurate. By combining the best algorithmic features from both packages the accuracy was substantially improved compared to their default performance. BioMed Central 2005-04-15 /pmc/articles/PMC1097716/ /pubmed/15831105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-6-99 Text en Copyright © 2005 Wistrand and Sonnhammer; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
spellingShingle Research Article
Wistrand, Markus
Sonnhammer, Erik LL
Improved profile HMM performance by assessment of critical algorithmic features in SAM and HMMER
title Improved profile HMM performance by assessment of critical algorithmic features in SAM and HMMER
title_full Improved profile HMM performance by assessment of critical algorithmic features in SAM and HMMER
title_fullStr Improved profile HMM performance by assessment of critical algorithmic features in SAM and HMMER
title_full_unstemmed Improved profile HMM performance by assessment of critical algorithmic features in SAM and HMMER
title_short Improved profile HMM performance by assessment of critical algorithmic features in SAM and HMMER
title_sort improved profile hmm performance by assessment of critical algorithmic features in sam and hmmer
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1097716/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15831105
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-6-99
work_keys_str_mv AT wistrandmarkus improvedprofilehmmperformancebyassessmentofcriticalalgorithmicfeaturesinsamandhmmer
AT sonnhammererikll improvedprofilehmmperformancebyassessmentofcriticalalgorithmicfeaturesinsamandhmmer