Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

More unclassified reads in demultiplexing. #81

Closed
rajwanir opened this issue Dec 5, 2020 · 3 comments
Closed

More unclassified reads in demultiplexing. #81

rajwanir opened this issue Dec 5, 2020 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@rajwanir
Copy link

rajwanir commented Dec 5, 2020

Hello,

I am trying to basecall some multiplexed r9.4 flongle runs with bonito standard model (dna_r9.4.1), however, I see a greater number unclassified reads upon demultiplexing with qcat.

Bonito + qcat:

Adapters detected in 47391 of 77425 reads
NBD103/NBD104 47391: | ############ | 61.21 %
none 27814 : | ####### | 35.92 %

Guppy + qcat

Adapters detected in 66724 of 77425 reads
NBD103/NBD104 66724: | ################# | 86.18 %
none 10621 : | ## | 13.72 %

The issue seems somewhat related to the one described here but I am using standard model. Could you please suggest on how to resolve this?

Thank you.

@iiSeymour iiSeymour self-assigned this Dec 7, 2020
@iiSeymour iiSeymour added the enhancement New feature or request label Dec 7, 2020
@iiSeymour
Copy link
Member

Hey @rajwanir

This is most likely a result of how the training set is put together with bonito basecaller --save-ctc .... Each training example has to pass a coverage threshold of 90% but thinking about it this is probably too low. I will have to retrain some models to verify this and get back to you.

@rajwanir
Copy link
Author

rajwanir commented Dec 7, 2020

Thanks @iiSeymour for your prompt response.

@iiSeymour
Copy link
Member

Demultiplexing performance should be on par with guppy in v0.3.6.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants