Cosic’s Resonance Recognition Model for Protein Sequences and Photon Emission Differentiates Lethal and Non-Lethal Ebola Strains: Implications for Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Cosic Resonance Recognition Model (RRM) for amino acid sequences was applied to the classes of proteins displayed by four strains (Sudan, Zaire, Reston, Ivory Coast) of Ebola virus that produced either high or minimal numbers of human fatalities. The results clearly differentiated highly lethal and non-lethal strains. Solutions for the two lethal strains exhibited near ultraviolet (~230 nm) photon values while the two asymptomatic forms displayed near infrared (~1000 nm) values. Cross-correlations of spectral densities of the RRM values of the different classes of proteins associated with the genome of the viruses supported this dichotomy. The strongest coefficient occurred only between Sudan-Zaire strains but not for any of the other pairs of strains for sGP, the small glycoprotein that intercalated with the plasma cell membrane to promote insertion of viral contents into cellular space. A surprising, statistically significant cross-spectral correlation occurred between the “spike” glycoprotein component (GP1) of the virus that associated the anchoring of the virus to the mammalian cell plasma membrane and the Schumann resonance of the earth whose intensities were determined by the incidence of equatorial thunderstorms. Previous applications of the RRM to shifting photon wavelengths emitted by melanoma cells adapting to reduced ambient temperature have validated Cosic’s model and have demonstrated very narrowwave-length (about 10 nm) specificity. One possible ancillary and non-invasive treatment of people within which the fatal Ebola strains are residing would be whole body application of narrow band near-infrared light pulsed as specific physiologically-patterned sequences with sufficient radiant flux density to perfuse the entire body volume.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".