End-to-End Data Automation for Pooled Sample SARS-CoV-2 Using R and Other Open-Source Tools
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
BACKGROUND: Due to supply chain shortages of reagents for real-time (RT)-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 and increasing demand on technical staff, an end-to-end data automation strategy for SARS-CoV-2 sample pooling and singleton analysis became necessary in the summer of 2020. METHODS: Using entirely open source software tools-Linux, bash, R, RShiny, ShinyProxy, and Docker-we developed a modular software application stack to manage the preanalytical, analytical, and postanalytical processes for singleton and pooled testing in a 5-week time frame. RESULTS: Pooling was operationalized for 81 days, during which time 64 pooled runs were performed for a total of 5320 sample pools and approximately 21 280 patient samples in 4:1 format. A total of 17 580 negative pooled results were released in bulk. After pooling was discontinued, the application stack was used for singleton analysis and modified to release all viral RT-PCR results from our laboratory. To date, 236 109 samples have been processed avoiding over 610 000 transcriptions. CONCLUSIONS: We present an end-to-end data automation strategy connecting 11 devices, one network attached storage, 2 Linux servers, and the laboratory information system.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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