Use when after generating probability predictions for potential modification sites (via ModiFinder.
Scanned 9/12/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add HolobiomicsLab/asb-skill-collections --skill spectrum-alignment-scoring --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Spectrum Alignment Scoring?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/holobiomicslab-spectrum-alignment-scoring-asb-skill-collections)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: spectrum-alignment-scoring
description: Use when after generating probability predictions for potential modification sites (via ModiFinder.
license: CC-BY-4.0
metadata:
edam_operation: http://edamontology.org/operation_3632
edam_topics:
- http://edamontology.org/topic_0121
- http://edamontology.org/topic_3370
tools:
- ModiFinder
- Python
- BasicEvaluationEngine
techniques:
- LC-MS
derived_from:
- doi: 10.1021/jasms.4c00061
title: ModiFinder
evidence_spans:
- mf = ModiFinder(known_compound, modified_compound, mz_tolerance=0.01, ppm_tolerance=40)
- mf = ModiFinder(known_compound, modified_compound, helpers=helpers_array, **args)
- ModiFinder requires Python 3.9 or above.
- ModiFinder requires Python 3.9 or above
- eval_engine = BasicEvaluationEngine(default_method="is_max")
- eval_engine = BasicEvaluationEngine(default_method="average_distance")
claims: []
provenance:
collection: https://w3id.org/holobiomicslab/asb-skill/collection/metabolomics/v2
assembled_by: scripts/collect_metabolomics_collection.py
sources:
- build: coll_modifinder_cq
doi: 10.1021/jasms.4c00061
title: ModiFinder
dedup_kept_from: coll_modifinder_cq
schema_version: 0.2.0
attribution:
generator: AgenticScienceBuilder
original_doi: 10.1021/jasms.4c00061
all_source_dois:
- 10.1021/jasms.4c00061
zenodo_doi: 10.5281/zenodo.20794027
curators: []
promoter: Louis-Félix Nothias
sponsor: CNRS & Université Côte d'Azur
---
# spectrum-alignment-scoring
## Summary
Score the alignment quality between known and modified compound MS/MS spectra using an evaluation engine that compares predicted modification site probabilities against observed spectral patterns. This skill quantifies how well a candidate modification hypothesis explains the tandem mass spectra.
## When to use
Apply this skill after generating probability predictions for potential modification sites (via ModiFinder.generate_probabilities()) and you need to evaluate whether a specific modification hypothesis—represented by an analog structure, target structure, and predicted probabilities—is consistent with observed MS/MS data. Use it when comparing multiple candidate modification sites or validating predicted structures against reference spectra.
## When NOT to use
- Input spectra have not been normalized or peak-filtered (use spectrum normalization and remove_small_peaks first)
- Probability predictions have not been generated by ModiFinder.generate_probabilities() (evaluation requires valid probability input)
- You are comparing raw spectra without intermediate site prediction—use ModiFinder.get_result() to obtain matched peaks and fragments first
## Inputs
- analog structure (unmodified compound SMILES or structure object)
- target structure (modified compound SMILES or structure object)
- predicted probabilities (dict or array from ModiFinder.generate_probabilities())
- evaluation method name (string: 'average_distance' or 'is_max')
## Outputs
- alignment score (float, typically 0–1 or normalized range)
- evaluation result (pass/fail or score comparison against reference)
## How to apply
Initialize a BasicEvaluationEngine with a specified scoring method (e.g., 'average_distance' as an alternative to 'is_max'). Call evaluate_single() passing the analog structure (unmodified compound), target structure (proposed modification), and predicted probabilities from ModiFinder. The engine computes an alignment score that measures spectral match quality; compare the returned score against expected reference values (e.g., 0.514 in the published workflow) to judge hypothesis validity. The choice of scoring method affects sensitivity to spectrum alignment patterns—average_distance provides continuous distance-based scoring rather than binary classification.
## Related tools
- **ModiFinder** (Generates probability predictions for modification sites and provides the probability input required by the evaluation engine) — https://github.com/Wang-Bioinformatics-Lab/ModiFinder_base
- **BasicEvaluationEngine** (Computes alignment scores between structures using configurable scoring methods (average_distance or is_max)) — https://github.com/Wang-Bioinformatics-Lab/ModiFinder_base
- **Python** (Runtime environment for ModiFinder and evaluation engine (requires Python 3.9 or above))
## Examples
```
from modifinder import BasicEvaluationEngine; engine = BasicEvaluationEngine(default_method='average_distance'); score = engine.evaluate_single(analog_structure, target_structure, predicted_probabilities); print(f'Alignment score: {score}'); assert abs(score - 0.514) < 0.01, f'Expected ~0.514, got {score}'
```
## Evaluation signals
- Returned score is a numeric value in expected range (e.g., 0.0–1.0 or comparable normalized scale)
- Score comparison against reference value documented in workflow produces consistent pass/fail status (e.g., score of 0.514 matches expected result)
- Scores for true modification pairs (known_compound vs modified_compound) are higher than scores for random/unrelated pairs, indicating discrimination power
- Evaluation completes without schema errors or type mismatches between input structures and probability format
- Swapping evaluation method from 'is_max' to 'average_distance' produces monotonic or interpretable differences in score magnitude while preserving rank order
## Limitations
- Evaluation score depends on quality of input probabilities; garbage probability input yields unreliable alignment scores
- No built-in penalty for chemically implausible modifications—evaluation is purely spectral and does not validate biochemical feasibility
- Scoring methods (average_distance, is_max) are abstractions over spectral alignment; choice of method can significantly affect score magnitude and interpretation
- Reference threshold values (e.g., 0.514) are method- and dataset-specific; direct transfer to new datasets may require recalibration
## Evidence
- [other] BasicEvaluationEngine with default_method='average_distance': "Instantiate BasicEvaluationEngine with default_method='average_distance'"
- [other] Call evaluate_single() with structures and probabilities: "Call evaluate_single() with the analog structure, target structure, and predicted probabilities to obtain the evaluation score"
- [other] Compare against reference value of 0.514: "Compare the returned score against the reference value of 0.514 and document the result"
- [other] average_distance scoring method as alternative to is_max: "Extend ModiFinder evaluation to the average_distance scoring method as an alternative to is_max"
- [other] ModiFinder provides evaluation capability within toolkit: "ModiFinder provides six categories of utilities—network, spectrum, file I/O, formula, molecule, and comparison utilities—that work seamlessly with core functionality"
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!