Dynamic analysis of a latent HIV infection model with CTL immune and antibody responses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper develops a mathematical model to investigate the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection dynamics. The model includes two transmission modes (cell-to-cell and cell-free), two adaptive immune responses (cytotoxic T-lymphocyte (CTL) and antibody), a saturated CTL immune response, and latent HIV infection. The existence and local stability of equilibria are fully characterized by four reproduction numbers. Through sensitivity analyses, we assess the partial rank correlation coefficients of these reproduction numbers and identify that the infection rate via cell-to-cell transmission, the number of new viruses produced by each infected cell during its life cycle, the clearance rate of free virions, and immune parameters have the greatest impact on the reproduction numbers. Additionally, we compare the effects of immune stimulation and cell-to-cell spread on the model’s dynamics. The findings highlight the significance of adaptive immune responses in increasing the population of uninfected cells and reducing the numbers of latent cells, infected cells, and viruses. Furthermore, cell-to-cell transmission is identified as a facilitator of HIV transmission. The analytical and numerical results presented in this study contribute to a better understanding of HIV dynamics and can potentially aid in improving HIV management strategies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".