Diagnosis of COVID-19 for controlling the pandemic: A review of the state-of-the-art
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To date, health organizations and countries around the world are struggling to completely control the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Scientists and researchers are developing tests for the rapid detection of individuals who may carry the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), while striving to find a suitable vaccine to immunize healthy individuals. As there are clinically reported cases of asymptomatic carriers of SARS-CoV-2, fast and accurate diagnosis plays an important role in the control and further prevention of this disease. Herein, we present recent technologies and techniques that have been implemented for the diagnosis of COVID-19. We summarize the methods created by different research institutes as well as the commercial devices and kits developed by companies for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. The description of the existing methods is followed by highlighting their advantages and challenges. Finally, we propose some promising techniques that could potentially be applied to the detection of SARS-CoV-2, and tracing the asymptomatic carriers of COVID-19 rapidly and accurately in the early stages of infection, based on reviewing the research studies on the detection of similar infectious viruses, especially severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus, and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) coronavirus.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it