MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140766917 · doi:10.1098/rspb.2006.3563

Dynamics of recurrent viral infection

2006· article· en· W2140766917 on OpenAlexafffund
Weiguang Yao, Laura Hertel, Lindi M. Wahl

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Cell Function and Interaction
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsViral infectionViral replicationCTL*Viral loadImmunologyVirologyBiologyInfectivityVirusCytotoxic T cellAntibodyImmune systemCD8Genetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In chronic viral infection, low levels of viral replication and infectious particle production are maintained over long periods, punctuated by brief bursts of high viral production and release. We apply well-established principles of modelling virus dynamics to the study of chronic viral infection, demonstrating that a model which incorporates the distinct contributions of cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs) and antibodies exhibits long periods of quiescence followed by brief bursts of viral production. This suggests that for recurrent viral infections, no special mechanism or exogenous trigger is necessary to provoke an episode of reactivation; rather, the system may naturally cycle through recurrent episodes at intervals which can be many years long. We also find that exogenous factors which cause small fluctuations in the natural course of the infection can trigger a recurrent episode. Our model predicts that longer periods between recurrences are associated with more severe viral episodes. Four factors move the system towards less frequent, more severe episodes: decreased viral infectivity, decreased CTL efficacy, decreased memory T cell response and increased antibody efficacy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations21
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesSame topicImmune Cell Function and InteractionFrench-language works237,207