Resolving a sequence's identifier via a current-day lookup manufactures false novelty in historical reference-database reconstruction whenever the identifier has been renumbered — a known, tooled mechanism whose rate and consequence had not been quantified. Among 56 sequences flagged as newly created between two snapshots, only 17 were genuinely absent; 39 existed under a predecessor identifier merged into today's. Retagging these 39 recovered 99.3% correct classification, versus 0.0% under naive tagging. Library-wide, this recovers 218-269 identifiers per snapshot for ten of thirteen transitions studied. Our correction is a lower bound, missing deletion and reuse. We give five recommendations to avoid it.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Habib Mahjoubi (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: