A Simple Genetic Algorithm for Optimizing Multiple Sequence Alignment on the Spread of the SARS Epidemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Multiple sequence alignment is a method of getting genomic relationships between 3 sequences or more. In multiple alignments, there are 3 mutation network analyses, namely topological network system, mutation region network and network system of mutation mode. In general, the three analyses show stable and unstable regions that map mutation regions. This area of mutation is described further in a phylogenetic tree which simultaneously illustrates the path of the spread of an epidemic, the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) epidemic. The process of spreading the SARS viruses, in this case, is described as the process of phylogenetic tree formation, and as a novelty of this research, multiple alignments in the process are analyzed in detail and then optimized with genetic algorithms. Methods: The data used to form the phylogenetic tree for the spread of the SARS epidemic are 14 DNA sequences which are then optimized by using genetic algorithms. The phylogenetic tree is constructed by using the neighbor-joining algorithm with a distance matrix that the intended distance is the genetic distance obtained from sequence alignment by using the Needleman Wunsch Algorithm. Results & Conclusion: The results of the analysis obtained 3649 stable areas and 19 unstable areas. The results of phylogenetic tree from the network system analysis indicated that the spread of the SARS epidemic extended from Guangzhou 16/12/02 to Zhongshan 27/12/02, then spread simultaneously to Guangzhou 18/02/03 and Guangzhou hospital. After that, the virus reached Metropole, Zhongshan, Hongkong, Singapore, Taiwan, Hong kong, and Hanoi which then continued to Guangzhou 01/01/03 and Toronto at once. The results of the mutation region network system demonstrate decomposition of orthogonal mutations in the 1st order arc.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".