Bibliographic record
Abstract
The need for a solution for room temperature storage of DNA is well known. Studies were conducted to assess stability of EBV DNA using Daykin Molecular Solutions GeneGuardDNA (Georgia). All laboratory testing was done at Prime Laboratories in Van Nuys California. The objective is to demonstrate sample stability of EBV DNA during shipping, storage, and multiple freeze/thaw cycles. To achieve the objectives, the study was divided into two parts; Part 1 to demonstrate stability during shipping and multiple freeze/thaw cycles. Samples were labeled as P1-1 (Positive sample 1, P1-2 first freeze/thaw, P1-3 second freeze/thaw, etc.). In Part 1 the standard deviation between positive samples ranged from 0.08 CTs to 0.25 CTs with no gradual deterioration detected with more freeze/thaw cycles). The average was 0.17 CT’s which is within the instrument’s precision range. In the past we have had no instance of repeating the same extracted sample more than two times. In Part 2 we demonstrated stability during storage. 185 archived clinical samples stored at room temperature from 2013 through 2017 were randomly chosen. DNA was extracted from these samples and EBV DNA assay testing was performed. The results from the new test were compared to the original results obtained for the samples. Concordance and p values were calculated to show the effects of long-term storage on the results of the EBV DNA assay. Pearson correlation coefficient between the original and recent assay results was 0.9564 with a p value of p<0.001 indicating statistically significant correlation between the two assay results. EBV DNA showed no deterioration of sample Ct signal was observed due to Freeze/Thaw cycles and the results were stable across multiple cycles for a period of 6 years at room temperature.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.050 | 0.049 |
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".