Repository navigation
Clarify peptide overlap labels and read quality evidence - #17
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Replace the report’s ambiguous “unaligned” label with “No clear peptide overlap,” including the recovery table and per-window explanations. Explain the six-amino-acid placement rule and distinguish it from RNA-to-genome mapping. Widen the summary table to keep the longer label readable.
Document the available read-quality evidence and its limitations, including the ABI3BP example, restricted-reference remapping, and synthetic Q30 values. Ranking and recovery counts remain unchanged: 17/36 primary recoveries and 25/36 across all outputs.
Validation: all 52 JavaScript tests pass; site build and diff checks pass; browser verification confirms the wording and table layout.