On the duration of the period between exposure to HIV and detectable infection
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
HIV infection cannot be detected immediately after exposure because plasma viral loads are too small initially. The duration of this phase of infection (the "eclipse period") is difficult to estimate because precise dates of exposure are rarely known. Therefore, the reliability of clinical HIV testing during the first few weeks of infection is unknown, creating anxiety among HIV-exposed individuals and their physicians. We address this by fitting stochastic models of early HIV infection to detailed viral load records for 78 plasma donors, taken during the period of exposure and infection. We first show that the classic stochastic birth-death model does not satisfactorily describe early infection. We therefore apply a different stochastic model that includes infected cells and virions separately. Since every plasma donor in our data eventually becomes infected, we must condition the model to reflect this bias, before fitting to the data. Applying our best estimates of unknown parameter values, we estimate the mean eclipse period to be 8-10 days. We further estimate the reliability of a negative test t days after potential exposure.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it