Relationships between Influenza viruses A and B and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) by sequence homologies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: While the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has been spreading and sweeping the world, the number of patients with influenza was much smaller than that in the past years. It is suspected that the coronavirus is not really a new virus that humans experience for the first time. From the aspect of view of gene comparison of influenza A and B viruses, and coronavirus, they are encoded of identified homologous regions. Methods: The gene sequences of influenza A and B viruses, and coronavirus were identified using data from the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI; Bethesda, MD, USA).Results: Relatively high homology in amino acid sequences between SARS-CoC-2 and influenza viruses, especially influenza B virus was identified. Coronavirus CDS 9 and CDS 11 encodes proteins that are homologous to proteins of influenza A or B viruses. The results suggest the possibility that antivirals in development or already in use for the medicine treatment of influenza can be effective against coronavirus. This may also suggest the possibility that individuals who experienced an influenza A or B infection within the past 1–2 years would have some immunity to 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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".