{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028112449799196786, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0017211703958691911, 'mean_word_length': 5.483271375464684, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Fundamentals of massive automatic pairwise alignments of protein sequences: theoretical significance of Z-value statistics

MOTIVATION
Different automatic methods of sequence alignments are routinely used as a starting point for homology searches and function inference. Confidence in an alignment probability is one of the major fundamentals of massive automatic genome-scale pairwise comparisons, for clustering of putative orthologs and paralogs, sequenced genome annotation or multiple-genomic tree constructions. Extreme value distribution based on the Karlin-Altschul model, usually advised for large-scale comparisons are not always valid, particularly in the case of comparisons of non-biased with nucleotide-biased genomes (such that of Plasmodium falciparum). Z-values estimates based on Monte Carlo technics, can be calculated experimentally for any alignment output, whatever the method used. Empirically, a Z-value higher than approximately 8 is supposed reasonable to assess that an alignment score is significant, but this arbitrary figure was never theoretically justified.


RESULTS
In this paper, we used the Bienaymé-Chebyshev inequality to demonstrate a theorem of the upper limit of an alignment score probability (or P-value). This theorem implies that a computed Z-value is a statistical test, a single-linkage clustering criterion and that 1/Z-value(2) is an upper limit to the probability of an alignment score whatever the actual probability law is. Therefore, this study provides the missing theoretical link between a Z-value cut-off used for an automatic clustering of putative orthologs and/or paralogs, and the corresponding statistical risk in such genome-scale comparisons (using non-biased or biased genomes).