Table S4. Performance statistics on alignment rate. a. Alignment rate (%) performance statistics on PacBio data of ten methods using five SR coverages. b. Alignment rate (%) performance statistics on ONT data of ten methods using five SR coverages. (XLSX 22 kb
Table S1. Comparison of mean sensitivity and mean specificity between HmmCleaner presets and PREQUAL...
Figure S3. Error rate correlation among different error-correction schemes. (a) Linear regression be...
Quality of reporting, percentage of cohort studies meeting each item including the âif applicableâ...
Table S2. Performance statistics on accuracy. a. Accuracy performance statistics on PacBio data of t...
Table S3. Performance statistics on output rate. a. Output rate (%) performance statistics on PacBio...
Table S5. Performance statistics on run time. a. Run time performance statistics on PacBio data of t...
Table S1. Performance statistics on sensitivity. a. Sensitivity performance statistics on PacBio dat...
Table S6. Performance statistics on memory usage. a. Memory usage performance statistics on PacBio d...
Note 1. Parameter settings of error correction methods. Note 2. Parameter settings of error correcti...
Figure S1. Improvements in TGS will lead to further adoption. Figure S2. Performance plots on sensit...
Table S7. Performance statistics on improving de novo assembly. a. Genome assembly performance stati...
Table S9. Memory usage performance statistics by the preprocessing modules of five error correction ...
Table S8. Performance of error correction methods on correcting bases at heterozygous positions. (XL...
Figure S1. Percentage of genome above various long read coverages on the A. thaliana data. Figure S2...
Interactive figure for comparison of performance metrics. (A) Absolute precision and recall for each...
Table S1. Comparison of mean sensitivity and mean specificity between HmmCleaner presets and PREQUAL...
Figure S3. Error rate correlation among different error-correction schemes. (a) Linear regression be...
Quality of reporting, percentage of cohort studies meeting each item including the âif applicableâ...
Table S2. Performance statistics on accuracy. a. Accuracy performance statistics on PacBio data of t...
Table S3. Performance statistics on output rate. a. Output rate (%) performance statistics on PacBio...
Table S5. Performance statistics on run time. a. Run time performance statistics on PacBio data of t...
Table S1. Performance statistics on sensitivity. a. Sensitivity performance statistics on PacBio dat...
Table S6. Performance statistics on memory usage. a. Memory usage performance statistics on PacBio d...
Note 1. Parameter settings of error correction methods. Note 2. Parameter settings of error correcti...
Figure S1. Improvements in TGS will lead to further adoption. Figure S2. Performance plots on sensit...
Table S7. Performance statistics on improving de novo assembly. a. Genome assembly performance stati...
Table S9. Memory usage performance statistics by the preprocessing modules of five error correction ...
Table S8. Performance of error correction methods on correcting bases at heterozygous positions. (XL...
Figure S1. Percentage of genome above various long read coverages on the A. thaliana data. Figure S2...
Interactive figure for comparison of performance metrics. (A) Absolute precision and recall for each...
Table S1. Comparison of mean sensitivity and mean specificity between HmmCleaner presets and PREQUAL...
Figure S3. Error rate correlation among different error-correction schemes. (a) Linear regression be...
Quality of reporting, percentage of cohort studies meeting each item including the âif applicableâ...
DOI
Add to ORKG