Exact-match search with functional variant prediction enables automated DNA screening
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Custom DNA synthesis underpins modern biology, but controlled genes in the wrong hands could threaten many lives and public trust in science. In .1992, a virology-trained mass murderer tried and failed to obtain physical samples of Ebola; today, viruses can be assembled from synthetic DNA fragments. Screening orders for controlled sequences is unreliable and expensive because current similarity search algorithms yield false alarms requiring expert human review. Exact-match search can achieve perfect specificity among short known sequences by detecting subsequences unique to controlled genes, but can be trivially evaded by incorporating mutations. Here we rescue exact-match search by additionally screening for predicted functional variants of pseudo-randomly chosen subsequences that aren’t found in known unregulated genes. To experimentally assess robustness, we protected nine windows from the M13 bacteriophage virus, then invited a “red team” to launch up to 21,000 attacks at each window and measure the fitness of their designed mutants. We identified defensible windows from regulated pathogens, built a test database that our experiments indicate will block 99.999% of functional attacks, and verified its sensitivity against redesigned enzymes. Exact-match search with functional variant prediction offers a promising way to safeguard biotechnology by automating DNA synthesis screening. Summary Searching for exact matches to pre-computed functional variants unique to controlled genes enables sensitive, secure, and automated DNA synthesis screening.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
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.
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".