Reconstructing contact network parameters from viral phylogenies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Models of the spread of disease in a population often make the simplifying assumption that the population is homogeneously mixed, or is divided into homogeneously mixed compartments. However, human populations have complex structures formed by social contacts, which can have a significant influence on the rate of epidemic spread. Contact network models capture this structure by explicitly representing each contact which could possibly lead to a transmission. We developed a method based on approximate Bayesian computation (ABC), a likelihood-free inference strategy, for estimating structural parameters of the contact network underlying an observed viral phylogeny. The method combines adaptive sequential Monte Carlo for ABC, Gillespie simulation for propagating epidemics though networks, and a kernel-based tree similarity score. We used the method to fit the Barabási-Albert network model to simulated transmission trees, and also applied it to viral phylogenies estimated from ten published HIV sequence datasets. This model incorporates a feature called preferential attachment (PA), whereby individuals with more existing contacts accumulate new contacts at a higher rate. On simulated data, we found that the strength of PA and the number of infected nodes in the network can often be accurately estimated. On the other hand, the mean degree of the network, as well as the total number of nodes, was not estimable with ABC. We observed sub-linear PA power in all datasets, as well as higher PA power in networks of injection drug users. These results underscore the importance of considering contact structures when performing phylodynamic inference. Our method offers the potential to quantitatively investigate the contact network structure underlying viral epidemics.
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 | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".