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...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
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 |