Phylodynamic Inference with Kernel ABC and Its Application to HIV Epidemiology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The shapes of phylogenetic trees relating virus populations are determined by the adaptation of viruses within each host, and by the transmission of viruses among hosts. Phylodynamic inference attempts to reverse this flow of information, estimating parameters of these processes from the shape of a virus phylogeny reconstructed from a sample of genetic sequences from the epidemic. A key challenge to phylodynamic inference is quantifying the similarity between two trees in an efficient and comprehensive way. In this study, I demonstrate that a new distance measure, based on a subset tree kernel function from computational linguistics, confers a significant improvement over previous measures of tree shape for classifying trees generated under different epidemiological scenarios. Next, I incorporate this kernel-based distance measure into an approximate Bayesian computation (ABC) framework for phylodynamic inference. ABC bypasses the need for an analytical solution of model likelihood, as it only requires the ability to simulate data from the model. I validate this "kernel-ABC" method for phylodynamic inference by estimating parameters from data simulated under a simple epidemiological model. Results indicate that kernel-ABC attained greater accuracy for parameters associated with virus transmission than leading software on the same data sets. Finally, I apply the kernel-ABC framework to study a recent outbreak of a recombinant HIV subtype in China. Kernel-ABC provides a versatile framework for phylodynamic inference because it can fit a broader range of models than methods that rely on the computation of exact likelihoods.
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 | 0.006 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".