MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405562539 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2412.12960

Does the random nature of cell-virus interactions during in vitro infections affect TCID$_{50}$ measurements and parameter estimation by mathematical models?

2024· preprint· en· W4405562539 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Christian Quirouette, Risavarshni Thevakumaran, Kyosuke Adachi, Catherine A. A. Beauchemin

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Mathematical SciencesRIKENJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)EstimationBiological systemIn vitroBiologyVirusStatistical physicsVirologyCell biologyMathematicsPhysicsPsychologyEconomicsGeneticsCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Endpoint dilution (TCID50) assays cannot count the number of infectious virions (IVs), and instead are limited to counting the number of Specific INfections caused by the sample (SIN). The latter depends not only on whether virions are infectious, but also on the cells and the experimental conditions under which they interact. These interactions are random and controlled by parameters such as the rates at which IVs lose infectivity, enter cells, or fail to replicate following cell entry. Here, stochastic TCID50 assays are simulated to determine how the random number of infected wells relates to the parameters and the number of IVs in a sample. We introduce a new parameter estimation method based on the likelihood of observing a given TCID50 assay outcome given the model-predicted number of IVs in the sample. We then successively evaluate how parameter estimates are affected by the use of: 1) the new likelihood function vs the typical assumption of Gaussian-distributed measurement errors; 2) IV vs SIN units to express virus in the model; and 3) a stochastic vs an ODE model to simulate the course of a virus infection. Unlike previous methods, the new likelihood correctly handles measurements beyond the detection limits, and results in non-Gaussian distributions. Expressing virus using IV units makes it possible to impose physical constraints (e.g. one IV cannot infect more than one cell), and yields more biologically useful parameters (e.g. mutation emergence likelihood depends on the number of IVs, not SIN, produced). Using a stochastic rather than an ODE model we show that the variability observed between replicate in vitro virus infections is consistent with the level of stochasticity introduced by the TCID50 assay, which can be reduced through better assay design. The framework introduced herein offers several important improvements over current methods and should be widely adopted.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicMathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology Models→French-language works237,207→