MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383645981 · doi:10.1093/molbev/msad156

Inferring Human Immunodeficiency Virus 1 Proviral Integration Dates With Bayesian Inference

2023· article· en· W4383645981 on OpenAlexafffund
Bradley R. Jones, Jeffrey B. Joy

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology and Evolution · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsAIDS VancouverUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsBiologyBayesian probabilityInferenceHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Bayesian inferenceLatency (audio)Bayes' theoremComputational biologyAntiretroviral therapyMachine learningComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceStatisticsVirologyViral loadMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV) proviruses archived in the persistent reservoir currently pose the greatest obstacle to HIV cure due to their evasion of combined antiretroviral therapy and ability to reseed HIV infection. Understanding the dynamics of the HIV persistent reservoir is imperative for discovering a durable HIV cure. Here, we explore Bayesian methods using the software BEAST2 to estimate HIV proviral integration dates. We started with within-host longitudinal HIV sequences collected prior to therapy, along with sequences collected from the persistent reservoir during suppressive therapy. We built a BEAST2 model to estimate integration dates of proviral sequences collected during suppressive therapy, implementing a tip date random walker to adjust the sequence tip dates and a latency-specific prior to inform the dates. To validate our method, we implemented it on both simulated and empirical data sets. Consistent with previous studies, we found that proviral integration dates were spread throughout active infection. Path sampling to select an alternative prior for date estimation in place of the latency-specific prior produced unrealistic results in one empirical data set, whereas on another data set, the latency-specific prior was selected as best fitting. Our Bayesian method outperforms current date estimation techniques with a root mean squared error of 0.89 years on simulated data relative to 1.23-1.89 years with previously developed methods. Bayesian methods offer an adaptable framework for inferring proviral integration dates.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology and EvolutionSame topicHIV Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207