You are presented with multiple paper abstracts, alongside the associated literature review and chapter titles. Given the provided information, you are going to do a literature review. Please generate a coherent literature review that synthesizes the content, draws connections between different works, highlights major findings, and identifies any gaps in the existing research.

Literature Review Title: A Survey of Computational Tools to Analyze and Interpret Whole Exome Sequencing Data 
Chapter Title:  Functional Predictors of Mutation. 
1. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB001):  High-throughput sequencing platforms are generating massive amounts of genetic variation data for diverse genomes, but it remains a challenge to pinpoint a small subset of functionally important variants. To fill these unmet needs, we developed the ANNOVAR tool to annotate single nucleotide variants (SNVs) and insertions/deletions, such as examining their functional consequence on genes, inferring cytogenetic bands, reporting functional importance scores, finding variants in conserved regions, or identifying variants reported in the 1000 Genomes Project and dbSNP. ANNOVAR can utilize annotation databases from the UCSC Genome Browser or any annotation data set conforming to Generic Feature Format version 3 (GFF3). We also illustrate a ‘variants reduction’ protocol on 4.7 million SNVs and indels from a human genome, including two causal mutations for Miller syndrome, a rare recessive disease. Through a stepwise procedure, we excluded variants that are unlikely to be causal, and identified 20 candidate genes including the causal gene. Using a desktop computer, ANNOVAR requires ∼4 min to perform gene-based annotation and ∼15 min to perform variants reduction on 4.7 million variants, making it practical to handle hundreds of human genomes in a day. ANNOVAR is freely available at http://www.openbioinformatics.org/annovar/. 
2. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB002):  To the Editor: ::: ::: Applications of rapidly advancing sequencing technologies exacerbate the need to interpret individual sequence variants. Sequencing of phenotyped clinical subjects will soon become a method of choice in studies of the genetic causes of Mendelian and complex diseases. New exon capture techniques will direct sequencing efforts towards the most informative and easily interpretable protein-coding fraction of the genome. Thus, the demand for computational predictions of the impact of protein sequence variants will continue to grow. ::: ::: Here we present a new method and the corresponding software tool, PolyPhen-2 (http://genetics.bwh.harvard.edu/pph2/), which is different from the early tool PolyPhen1 in the set of predictive features, alignment pipeline, and the method of classification (Fig. 1a). PolyPhen-2 uses eight sequence-based and three structure-based predictive features (Supplementary Table 1) which were selected automatically by an iterative greedy algorithm (Supplementary Methods). Majority of these features involve comparison of a property of the wild-type (ancestral, normal) allele and the corresponding property of the mutant (derived, disease-causing) allele, which together define an amino acid replacement. Most informative features characterize how well the two human alleles fit into the pattern of amino acid replacements within the multiple sequence alignment of homologous proteins, how distant the protein harboring the first deviation from the human wild-type allele is from the human protein, and whether the mutant allele originated at a hypermutable site2. The alignment pipeline selects the set of homologous sequences for the analysis using a clustering algorithm and then constructs and refines their multiple alignment (Supplementary Fig. 1). The functional significance of an allele replacement is predicted from its individual features (Supplementary Figs. 2–4) by Naive Bayes classifier (Supplementary Methods). ::: ::: ::: ::: Figure 1 ::: ::: PolyPhen-2 pipeline and prediction accuracy. (a) Overview of the algorithm. (b) Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for predictions made by PolyPhen-2 using five-fold cross-validation on HumDiv (red) and HumVar3 (light green). UniRef100 (solid ... ::: ::: ::: ::: We used two pairs of datasets to train and test PolyPhen-2. We compiled the first pair, HumDiv, from all 3,155 damaging alleles with known effects on the molecular function causing human Mendelian diseases, present in the UniProt database, together with 6,321 differences between human proteins and their closely related mammalian homologs, assumed to be non-damaging (Supplementary Methods). The second pair, HumVar3, consists of all the 13,032 human disease-causing mutations from UniProt, together with 8,946 human nsSNPs without annotated involvement in disease, which were treated as non-damaging. ::: ::: We found that PolyPhen-2 performance, as presented by its receiver operating characteristic curves, was consistently superior compared to PolyPhen (Fig. 1b) and it also compared favorably with the three other popular prediction tools4–6 (Fig. 1c). For a false positive rate of 20%, PolyPhen-2 achieves the rate of true positive predictions of 92% and 73% on HumDiv and HumVar, respectively (Supplementary Table 2). ::: ::: One reason for a lower accuracy of predictions on HumVar is that nsSNPs assumed to be non-damaging in HumVar contain a sizable fraction of mildly deleterious alleles. In contrast, most of amino acid replacements assumed non-damaging in HumDiv must be close to selective neutrality. Because alleles that are even mildly but unconditionally deleterious cannot be fixed in the evolving lineage, no method based on comparative sequence analysis is ideal for discriminating between drastically and mildly deleterious mutations, which are assigned to the opposite categories in HumVar. Another reason is that HumDiv uses an extra criterion to avoid possible erroneous annotations of damaging mutations. ::: ::: For a mutation, PolyPhen-2 calculates Naive Bayes posterior probability that this mutation is damaging and reports estimates of false positive (the chance that the mutation is classified as damaging when it is in fact non-damaging) and true positive (the chance that the mutation is classified as damaging when it is indeed damaging) rates. A mutation is also appraised qualitatively, as benign, possibly damaging, or probably damaging (Supplementary Methods). ::: ::: The user can choose between HumDiv- and HumVar-trained PolyPhen-2. Diagnostics of Mendelian diseases requires distinguishing mutations with drastic effects from all the remaining human variation, including abundant mildly deleterious alleles. Thus, HumVar-trained PolyPhen-2 should be used for this task. In contrast, HumDiv-trained PolyPhen-2 should be used for evaluating rare alleles at loci potentially involved in complex phenotypes, dense mapping of regions identified by genome-wide association studies, and analysis of natural selection from sequence data, where even mildly deleterious alleles must be treated as damaging. 
3. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB003):  The rate at which nonsynonymous single nucleotide polymorphisms (nsSNPs) are being identified in the human genome is increasing dramatically owing to advances in whole-genome/whole-exome sequencing technologies. Automated methods capable of accurately and reliably distinguishing between pathogenic and functionally neutral nsSNPs are therefore assuming ever-increasing importance. Here, we describe the Functional Analysis Through Hidden Markov Models (FATHMM) software and server: a species-independent method with optional species-specific weightings for the prediction of the functional effects of protein missense variants. Using a model weighted for human mutations, we obtained performance accuracies that outperformed traditional prediction methods (i.e., SIFT, PolyPhen, and PANTHER) on two separate benchmarks. Furthermore, in one benchmark, we achieve performance accuracies that outperform current state-of-the-art prediction methods (i.e., SNPs&GO and MutPred). We demonstrate that FATHMM can be efficiently applied to high-throughput/large-scale human and nonhuman genome sequencing projects with the added benefit of phenotypic outcome associations. To illustrate this, we evaluated nsSNPs in wheat (Triticum spp.) to identify some of the important genetic variants responsible for the phenotypic differences introduced by intense selection during domestication. A Web-based implementation of FATHMM, including a high-throughput batch facility and a downloadable standalone package, is available at http://fathmm.biocompute.org.uk. 
4. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB004):  BackgroundWhole exome sequencing studies identify hundreds to thousands of rare protein coding variants of ambiguous significance for human health. Computational tools are needed to accelerate the identification of specific variants and genes that contribute to human disease.ResultsWe have developed the Variant Effect Scoring Tool (VEST), a supervised machine learning-based classifier, to prioritize rare missense variants with likely involvement in human disease. The VEST classifier training set comprised ~ 45,000 disease mutations from the latest Human Gene Mutation Database release and another ~45,000 high frequency (allele frequency > 1%) putatively neutral missense variants from the Exome Sequencing Project. VEST outperforms some of the most popular methods for prioritizing missense variants in carefully designed holdout benchmarking experiments (VEST ROC AUC = 0.91, PolyPhen2 ROC AUC = 0.86, SIFT4.0 ROC AUC = 0.84). VEST estimates variant score p-values against a null distribution of VEST scores for neutral variants not included in the VEST training set. These p-values can be aggregated at the gene level across multiple disease exomes to rank genes for probable disease involvement. We tested the ability of an aggregate VEST gene score to identify candidate Mendelian disease genes, based on whole-exome sequencing of a small number of disease cases. We used whole-exome data for two Mendelian disorders for which the causal gene is known. Considering only genes that contained variants in all cases, the VEST gene score ranked dihydroorotate dehydrogenase (DHODH) number 2 of 2253 genes in four cases of Miller syndrome, and myosin-3 (MYH3) number 2 of 2313 genes in three cases of Freeman Sheldon syndrome.ConclusionsOur results demonstrate the potential power gain of aggregating bioinformatics variant scores into gene-level scores and the general utility of bioinformatics in assisting the search for disease genes in large-scale exome sequencing studies. VEST is available as a stand-alone software package at http://wiki.chasmsoftware.org and is hosted by the CRAVAT web server at http://www.cravat.us 
5. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB005):  Our capacity to sequence human genomes has exceeded our ability to interpret genetic variation. Current genomic annotations tend to exploit a single information type (e.g. conservation) and/or are restricted in scope (e.g. to missense changes). Here, we describe Combined Annotation Dependent Depletion (CADD), a framework that objectively integrates many diverse annotations into a single, quantitative score. We implement CADD as a support vector machine trained to differentiate 14.7 million high-frequency human derived alleles from 14.7 million simulated variants. We pre-compute “C-scores” for all 8.6 billion possible human single nucleotide variants and enable scoring of short insertions/deletions. C-scores correlate with allelic diversity, annotations of functionality, pathogenicity, disease severity, experimentally measured regulatory effects, and complex trait associations, and highly rank known pathogenic variants within individual genomes. The ability of CADD to prioritize functional, deleterious, and pathogenic variants across many functional categories, effect sizes and genetic architectures is unmatched by any current annotation. 
6. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB006):  Accurate deleteriousness prediction for nonsynonymous variants is crucial for distinguishing pathogenic mutations from background polymorphisms in whole exome sequencing (WES) studies. Although many deleteriousness prediction methods have been developed, their prediction results are sometimes inconsistent with each other and their relative merits are still unclear in practical applications. To address these issues, we comprehensively evaluated the predictive performance of 18 current deleteriousness-scoring methods, including 11 function prediction scores (PolyPhen-2, SIFT, MutationTaster, Mutation Assessor, FATHMM, LRT, PANTHER, PhD-SNP, SNAP, SNPs&GO and MutPred), 3 conservation scores (GERP++, SiPhy and PhyloP) and 4 ensemble scores (CADD, PON-P, KGGSeq and CONDEL). We found that FATHMM and KGGSeq had the highest discriminative power among independent scores and ensemble scores, respectively. Moreover, to ensure unbiased performance evaluation of these prediction scores, we manually collected three distinct testing datasets, on which no current prediction scores were tuned. In addition, we developed two new ensemble scores that integrate nine independent scores and allele frequency. Our scores achieved the highest discriminative power compared with all the deleteriousness prediction scores tested and showed low false-positive prediction rate for benign yet rare nonsynonymous variants, which demonstrated the value of combining information from multiple orthologous approaches. Finally, to facilitate variant prioritization in WES studies, we have pre-computed our ensemble scores for 87 347 044 possible variants in the whole-exome and made them publicly available through the ANNOVAR software and the dbNSFP database.

Literature Review:
Besides knowing if a particular variant has been previously identified, researchers may also want to determine the effect of a variant. Many functional prediction tools have been developed that all vary slightly in their algorithms. While individual prediction software can be used, ANNOVAR provides users with scores from several different functional predictors including SIFT, PolyPhen-2, LRT, FATHMM, MetaSVM, MetaLR, VEST, and CADD BIB002 . SIFT determines if a variant is deleterious using PSI-BLAST to determine conservation of amino acids based on closely related sequence alignments BIB001 . PolyPhen-2 uses a pipeline involving eight sequence based methods and three structure based methods in order to determine if a mutation is benign, probably deleterious, or known to be deleterious BIB003 . The Likelihood Ratio Test (LRT) uses conservation between closely related species to determine a mutations functional impact  . When three genomes underwent analysis by SIFT, PolyPhen-2, and LRT, only 5% of all predicted deleterious mutations were agreed to be deleterious by all three methods  . Therefore, it has been shown that using multiple mutational predictors is necessary for detecting a wide range of deleterious SNVs. FATHMM employs sequence conservation within Hidden Markov Models for predicting the functional effects of protein missense mutation BIB004 . FATHMM weighs mutations based on their pathogenicity by the predicted interaction of the protein domain BIB004 . MetaSVM and MetaLR represent two ensemble methods that combine 10 predictor scores (SIFT, PolyPhen-2 HDIV, PolyPhen-2 HVAR, GERP++, MutationTaster, Mutation Assessor, FATHMM, LRT, SiPhy, and PhyloP) and the maximum frequency observed in the 1000 genomes populations for predicting the deleterious variants BIB007 . MetaSVM and MetaLR are based on the ensemble Support Vector Machine (SVM) and Logistic Regression (LR), respectively, for predicting the final variant scores BIB007 . The Variant Effect Scoring Tool (VEST) is similar to MetaSVM and MetaLR in that it uses a training set and machine learning to predict functionality of mutations BIB005 . The main difference in the VEST approach is that the training set and prediction methodology are specifically designed for Mendelian studies BIB005 . The Combined Annotation Dependent Depletion (CADD) method differentiates itself by integrating multiple variants with mutations that have survived natural selection as well as simulated mutations BIB006 . While all of these methods predict the functionality of a mutation, they all vary slightly in their methodological and biological assumptions. Dong et al. have recently tested the performance of these prediction algorithms on known datasets BIB007 . They pointed out that these methods rarely unanimously agree on if a mutation is deleterious. Therefore, it is important to consider the methodology of the predictor as well as the focus of the study when interpreting deleterious prediction results.