MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022856370 · doi:10.1101/2020.05.05.079400

Massive Multiplexing Can Deliver a $1 Test for COVID-19

2020· preprint· en· W3022856370 on OpenAlexafffund
Paul D. N. Hebert, Sean WJ Prosser, Natalia V. Ivanova, Evgeny V. Zakharov, Sujeevan Ratnasingham

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationCanada Research ChairsCanada First Research Excellence FundUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Protocol (science)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)ScalabilityPandemicVirologyComputer scienceGenomeComputational biologyDNA sequencingBiologyGeneInfectious disease (medical specialty)MedicineDiseaseGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The severe acute respiratory syndrome virus, SARS-CoV-2 (hereafter COVID-19), rapidly achieved global pandemic status, provoking large-scale screening programs in many nations. Their activation makes it imperative to identify methods that can deliver a diagnostic result at low cost. This paper describes an approach which employs sequence variation in the gene coding for its envelope protein as the basis for a scalable, inexpensive test for COVID-19. It achieves this by coupling a simple RNA extraction protocol with low-volume RT-PCR, followed by E-Gel screening and sequencing on high-throughput platforms to analyze 10,000 samples in a run. Slight modifications to the protocol could support screening programs for other known viruses and for viral discovery. Just as the $1,000 genome is transforming medicine, a $1 diagnostic test for viral and bacterial pathogens would represent a major advance for public health.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.288
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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testingFrench-language works237,207