MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3020342098 · doi:10.1101/2020.04.19.048751

Revealing COVID-19 Transmission by SARS-CoV-2 Genome Sequencing and Agent Based Modelling

2020· preprint· en· W3020342098 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rebecca J. Rockett, Alicia Arnott, Rosemarie Sadsad, Verlaine Timms, Karen-Ann Gray, John‐Sebastian Eden, Sheryl L. Chang, Mailie Gall, Jenny Draper, Eby Sim, Nathan L. Bachmann, Ian Carter, Kerri Basile, Roy Byun, Matthew O’Sullivan, Sharon C.‐A. Chen, Susan Maddocks, Tania C. Sorrell, Dominic E. Dwyer, Edward C. Holmes, Jen Kok, Mikhail Prokopenko, Vitali Sintchenko

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Transmission (telecommunications)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)GenomeOutbreak2019-20 coronavirus outbreakQuarter (Canadian coin)Public healthPandemicDNA sequencingWhole genome sequencingBiologyVirologyComputational biologyGeographyGeneticsMedicineComputer scienceInfectious disease (medical specialty)GeneDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Community transmission of the new coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is a major public health concern that remains difficult to assess. We present a genomic survey of SARS-CoV-2 from a during the first 10 weeks of COVID-19 activity in New South Wales, Australia. Transmission events were monitored prospectively during the critical period of implementation of national control measures. SARS-CoV-2 genomes were sequenced from 209 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 infection between January and March 2020. Only a quarter of cases appeared to be locally acquired and genomic-based estimates of local transmission rates were concordant with predictions from a computational agent-based model. This convergent assessment indicates that genome sequencing provides key information to inform public health action and has improved our understanding of the COVID-19 evolution from outbreak to epidemic.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.217
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.233 · 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.

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

Citations41
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchFrench-language works237,207