Timeline for Tools for simulating Oxford Nanopore reads
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 12, 2017 at 18:03 | vote | accept | Daniel Standage | ||
| Jun 8, 2017 at 11:52 | history | edited | gringer♦ |
removed 3GS tag -- this doesn't apply to PacBio
|
|
| S Jun 8, 2017 at 11:41 | history | suggested | Scott Gigante |
standardise nanopore tag
|
|
| Jun 8, 2017 at 3:46 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jun 8, 2017 at 11:41 | |||||
| May 29, 2017 at 19:09 | answer | added | Karel Břinda | timeline score: 11 | |
| May 24, 2017 at 20:10 | review | Close votes | |||
| May 25, 2017 at 18:49 | |||||
| S May 24, 2017 at 18:21 | history | suggested | Franck Dernoncourt |
add Software Recommendation tag
|
|
| May 24, 2017 at 17:35 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S May 24, 2017 at 18:21 | |||||
| May 24, 2017 at 3:36 | answer | added | gringer♦ | timeline score: 3 | |
| May 23, 2017 at 2:32 | comment | added | Daniel Standage | It's often useful to simulate a variant or some other type of genomic artifact to evaluate whether a tool or set of tools can correctly identify the artifact. This is much easier to do on simulated data where you know the exact answer, and is extremely valuable even if the simulated data isn't a perfect reflection of real data. | |
| May 22, 2017 at 23:37 | comment | added | Scott Gigante | What are you planning on simulating data for? In my opinion, given the wealth of publicly available real datasets, there is little need for simulation except in very specific use cases. | |
| May 22, 2017 at 23:05 | answer | added | burger | timeline score: 7 | |
| May 22, 2017 at 22:11 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| May 23, 2017 at 2:33 | |||||
| May 22, 2017 at 20:43 | answer | added | Leo Martins | timeline score: 9 | |
| May 22, 2017 at 18:36 | review | Low quality posts | |||
| May 22, 2017 at 22:05 | |||||
| May 22, 2017 at 18:19 | history | asked | Daniel Standage | CC BY-SA 3.0 |