Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • javijevi
    Member
    • Jan 2010
    • 38

    #1

    BFAST error in FindMatchesInIndexSet function

    Hi all,

    I successfully went along the first steps of BFAST pipeline, including the indexes creation, but got the below copied error when running 'bfast match' step with the following command for a fastq test file with 9 reads:

    bfast match -f reference_genome.fa -A 1 -r test.fastq -i 1 -I 2-10 1> matches.bmf 2> match.log &

    Contents of match.log:
    (...)
    Searching index file 1/1 (index #1, bin #1) complete...
    Found 4 matches.
    Found matches for 4 reads.
    Copying unmatched reads for secondary index search.
    Splitting unmatched reads into temp files.
    bfast: RunMatch.c:718: FindMatchesInIndexSet: Assertion `numReads == numWritten' failed.
    Splitting unmatched reads into temp files.
    bfast: RunMatch.c:718: FindMatchesInIndexSet: Assertion `numReads == numWritten' failed.

    Any idea?

    Thanks in advance.
  • javijevi
    Member
    • Jan 2010
    • 38

    #2
    Originally posted by javijevi View Post
    Splitting unmatched reads into temp files.
    bfast: RunMatch.c:718: FindMatchesInIndexSet: Assertion `numReads == numWritten' failed.
    Splitting unmatched reads into temp files.
    bfast: RunMatch.c:718: FindMatchesInIndexSet: Assertion `numReads == numWritten' failed.
    Just to tell that I made a mistake in copying twice the last two lines of the output.

    Comment

    • nilshomer
      Nils Homer
      • Nov 2008
      • 1283

      #3
      Originally posted by javijevi View Post
      Hi all,

      I successfully went along the first steps of BFAST pipeline, including the indexes creation, but got the below copied error when running 'bfast match' step with the following command for a fastq test file with 9 reads:

      bfast match -f reference_genome.fa -A 1 -r test.fastq -i 1 -I 2-10 1> matches.bmf 2> match.log &

      Contents of match.log:
      (...)
      Searching index file 1/1 (index #1, bin #1) complete...
      Found 4 matches.
      Found matches for 4 reads.
      Copying unmatched reads for secondary index search.
      Splitting unmatched reads into temp files.
      bfast: RunMatch.c:718: FindMatchesInIndexSet: Assertion `numReads == numWritten' failed.
      Splitting unmatched reads into temp files.
      bfast: RunMatch.c:718: FindMatchesInIndexSet: Assertion `numReads == numWritten' failed.

      Any idea?

      Thanks in advance.
      Any reason why you want to use secondary indexes? I would recommend using all the indexes in the primary search (no secondary indexes).

      This may be a bug (with the secondary search). Please submit your report to [email protected] so we can resolve the issue quickly.

      Comment

      • nilshomer
        Nils Homer
        • Nov 2008
        • 1283

        #4
        Originally posted by nilshomer View Post
        Any reason why you want to use secondary indexes? I would recommend using all the indexes in the primary search (no secondary indexes).

        This may be a bug (with the secondary search). Please submit your report to [email protected] so we can resolve the issue quickly.
        I have found the bug and fixed the latest source code available via GIT. Let me know if you have any problems: )

        Comment

        • javijevi
          Member
          • Jan 2010
          • 38

          #5
          Originally posted by nilshomer View Post
          Any reason why you want to use secondary indexes? I would recommend using all the indexes in the primary search (no secondary indexes).
          In BFAST book, you can find the following: 'If you wish to have a secondary set of indexes, which are used if no matches are found in the main set of indexes, use the -I option'. So, I thought that it was more efficient to not use a mismatch-allowing index, e.g., 1110111110011111, for reads which were already mapped by using an all-matchs index, that is, 11111111111111.

          Obviously, I missed something important in this issue because of the complexity of the index-based search algorithm for a biologist, and I therefore will blindly follow your recommendation about not using secondary indexes.

          Comment

          • nilshomer
            Nils Homer
            • Nov 2008
            • 1283

            #6
            Originally posted by javijevi View Post
            In BFAST book, you can find the following: 'If you wish to have a secondary set of indexes, which are used if no matches are found in the main set of indexes, use the -I option'. So, I thought that it was more efficient to not use a mismatch-allowing index, e.g., 1110111110011111, for reads which were already mapped by using an all-matchs index, that is, 11111111111111.

            Obviously, I missed something important in this issue because of the complexity of the index-based search algorithm for a biologist, and I therefore will blindly follow your recommendation about not using secondary indexes.
            I have spent a lot of time thinking about the indexing strategy and I would follow the strategy found in section 7.1 where we use 10 "main" indexes and no secondary indexes.

            I apologize for the confusion but I tried to keep options for flexibility.

            Comment

            Latest Articles

            Collapse

            • SEQadmin2
              Multiomic Liquid Biopsy: What DNA/RNA Panels Reveal That DNA Alone Can’t
              by SEQadmin2



              Tumors contain complex mixtures of cell populations that evolve in response to treatment and host-specific factors. Tissue biopsies provide only static snapshots of a tumor’s state. But what if we could follow that evolution over time using a minimally invasive technique?

              Liquid biopsies can detect tumor-derived material circulating in the bloodstream, providing a way to study treatment response, detect emerging resistance, and discover new biomarkers. Circulating
              ...
              10-14-2026, 09:55 AM
            • SEQadmin2
              New Genomics Technologies Take Aim at Long-Standing Limits
              by SEQadmin2


              Researchers using sequencing and genomics tools often have to make trade-offs. They can choose between speed or scale, short reads or long-range information, or targeted panels or a view of the whole transcriptome. New technologies that have been released this year are built to address those tough choices.

              We asked six companies the same four questions to learn about their latest products. The new technologies bring a lot to the table, including rethinking sequencing
              ...
              09-28-2026, 10:25 AM

            ad_right_rmr

            Collapse

            News

            Collapse

            Topics Statistics Last Post
            Started by SEQadmin2, Yesterday, 11:13 AM
            0 responses
            19 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, Yesterday, 10:48 AM
            0 responses
            18 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 10-15-2026, 10:52 AM
            0 responses
            36 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 10-14-2026, 05:39 AM
            0 responses
            42 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Working...