Optimized phylogenetic clustering of HIV-1 sequence data for public health applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clusters of genetically similar infections suggest rapid transmission and may indicate priorities for public health action or reveal underlying epidemiological processes. However, clusters often require user-defined thresholds and are sensitive to non-epidemiological factors, such as non-random sampling. Consequently the ideal threshold for public health applications varies substantially across settings. Here, we show a method which selects optimal thresholds for phylogenetic (subset tree) clustering based on population. We evaluated this method on HIV-1 pol datasets (n = 14, 221 sequences) from four sites in USA (Tennessee, Washington), Canada (Northern Alberta) and China (Beijing). Clusters were defined by tips descending from an ancestral node (with a minimum bootstrap support of 95%) through a series of branches, each with a length below a given threshold. Next, we used pplacer to graft new cases to the fixed tree by maximum likelihood. We evaluated the effect of varying branch-length thresholds on cluster growth as a count outcome by fitting two Poisson regression models: a null model that predicts growth from cluster size, and an alternative model that includes mean collection date as an additional covariate. The alternative model was favoured by AIC across most thresholds, with optimal (greatest difference in AIC) thresholds ranging 0.007-0.013 across sites. The range of optimal thresholds was more variable when re-sampling 80% of the data by location (IQR 0.008 - 0.016, n = 100 replicates). Our results use prospective phylogenetic cluster growth and suggest that there is more variation in effective thresholds for public health than those typically used in clustering studies.
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 | 0.013 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".