Dynamics of evolutionary competition between budding and lytic viral release strategies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we consider the evolutionary competition between budding and lytic viral release strategies, using a delay differential equation model with distributed delay. When antibody is not established, the dynamics of competition depends on the respective basic reproductive ratios of the two viruses. If the basic reproductive ratio of budding virus is greater than that of lytic virus and one, budding virus can survive. When antibody is established for both strains but the neutralization capacities are the same for both strains, consequence of the competition also depends only on the basic reproductive ratios of the budding and lytic viruses. Using two concrete forms of the viral production functions, we are also able to conclude that budding virus will outcompete if the rates of viral production, death rates of infected cells and neutralizing capacities of the antibodies are the same for budding and lytic viruses. In this case, budding strategy would have an evolutionary advantage. However, if the antibody neutralization capacity for the budding virus is larger than that for the lytic virus, the lytic virus can outcompete the budding virus provided that its reproductive ratio is very high. An explicit threshold is derived.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".