MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010643394 · doi:10.1637/7625-042706r1.1

Computational Identification of Reassortments in Avian Influenza Viruses

2007· article· en· W2010643394 on OpenAlexaff
Xiu‐Feng Wan, Xiao‐Meng Wu, Guohui Lin, Samuel B. Holton, Racheal A. Desmone, Chi‐Ren Shyu, Yi Guan, Michael Emch

Bibliographic record

VenueAvian Diseases · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReassortmentBiologyHemagglutinin (influenza)Phylogenetic treeVirologyNeuraminidaseNucleoproteinGeneticsInfluenza A virus subtype H5N1PolymeraseRNA polymeraseGeneInfluenza A virusH5N1 genetic structureRNAVirusCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The avian influenza virus (AIV) has eight genomic segments (hemagglutinin [HA], neuraminidase [NA], RNA polymerase subunit A [PA], RNA polymerase subunit B1 [PB1], RNA polymerase subunit B2 [PB2], nucleoprotein [NP], nonstructural gene [NS], and matrix protein [M]). The genetic reassortments, recombinations, and mutations lead to a rapid emergence of novel genotypes of the AIVs during their evolution. These emerging viruses provide a large reservoir for pandemic strains. Here we describe a novel computational strategy for genetic reassortment identification. In contrast to the traditional phylogenetic approaches, our method views the genotypes through the modules in networks. Genetic segments with short phylogenetic distance are grouped into modules. Our method is not limited to the number of sequences. We applied this method in reassortment identification of NP segments in H5N1 AIVs. We identified two new potential reassortments for H5N1 AIVs beyond the reported genotypes in literature.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.342 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAvian DiseasesSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207