MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951830857 · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1900033

SIMON, an Automated Machine Learning System, Reveals Immune Signatures of Influenza Vaccine Responses

2019· article· en· W2951830857 on OpenAlexaff
Adriana Tomić, Ivan Tomic, Yael Rosenberg‐Hasson, Cornelia L. Dekker, Holden T. Maecker, Mark M. Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Immunology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
KeywordsImmune systemInfluenza vaccineVirologyImmunologyMedicineComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceVaccination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Machine learning holds considerable promise for understanding complex biological processes such as vaccine responses. Capturing interindividual variability is essential to increase the statistical power necessary for building more accurate predictive models. However, available approaches have difficulty coping with incomplete datasets which is often the case when combining studies. Additionally, there are hundreds of algorithms available and no simple way to find the optimal one. In this study, we developed Sequential Iterative Modeling “OverNight” (SIMON), an automated machine learning system that compares results from 128 different algorithms and is particularly suitable for datasets containing many missing values. We applied SIMON to data from five clinical studies of seasonal influenza vaccination. The results reveal previously unrecognized CD4+ and CD8+ T cell subsets strongly associated with a robust Ab response to influenza Ags. These results demonstrate that SIMON can greatly speed up the choice of analysis modalities. Hence, it is a highly useful approach for data-driven hypothesis generation from disparate clinical datasets. Our strategy could be used to gain biological insight from ever-expanding heterogeneous datasets that are publicly available.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.552

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations64
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of ImmunologySame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207