You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Should we remove q and Bitcount() in the randstrobe linking function? Bitcount() uses popcount which seems computationally expensive compared to other link methods (I can show you some results from another study offline). q and Bitcount() were initially introduced to skew the sampling towards shorter seeds, which positively affected the shortest reads (=< 100ish), but with above settings, read lengths 50-100 does not even need this computation.
Note: For read lengths were a proper window is used (150 and up) this may affect the recent parameter optimisations.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The std::bitset<64>::count() method compiles down to a single POPCNT machine instruction, so it should be quite fast (with the proper compiler options). I can measure it, though.
Posting from discussion in #350 (comment)
Should we remove
q
andBitcount()
in the randstrobe linking function?Bitcount()
uses popcount which seems computationally expensive compared to other link methods (I can show you some results from another study offline).q
andBitcount()
were initially introduced to skew the sampling towards shorter seeds, which positively affected the shortest reads (=< 100ish), but with above settings, read lengths 50-100 does not even need this computation.Note: For read lengths were a proper window is used (150 and up) this may affect the recent parameter optimisations.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: