Competitive Amplification Networks enable molecular pattern recognition with PCR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Gene expression has great potential to be used as a clinical diagnostic tool. However, despite the progress in identifying these gene expression signatures, clinical translation has been hampered by a lack of purpose-built. readily deployable testing platforms. We have developed Competitive Amplification Networks. CANs to enable analysis of an entire gene expression signature in a single PCR reaction. CANs consist of natural and synthetic amplicons that compete for shared primers during amplification, forming a reaction network that leverages the molecular machinery of PCR. These reaction components are tuned such that the final fluorescent signal from the assay is exactly calibrated to the conclusion of a statistical model. In essence, the reaction acts as a biological computer, simultaneously detecting the RNA targets, interpreting their level in the context of the gene expression signature, and aggregating their contributions to the final diagnosis. We illustrate the clinical validity of this technique, demonstrating perfect diagnostic agreement with the gold-standard approach of measuring each gene independently. Crucially, CAN assays are compatible with existing qPCR instruments and workflows. CANs hold the potential to enable rapid deployment and massive scalability of gene expression analysis to clinical laboratories around the world, in highly developed and low-resource J settings alike. Abstract Figure
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.006 |
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".