Craft: A Machine Learning Approach to Dengue Subtyping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Motivation The dengue virus poses a major global health threat, with nearly 390 million infections annually. A recently proposed hierarchical dengue nomenclature system enhances spatial resolution by defining major and minor lineages within genotypes, aiding efforts to track viral evolution. While current subtyping tools – Genome Detective, GLUE, and NextClade – rely on computationally intensive sequence alignment and phylogenetic inference, machine learning presents a promising alternative for achieving accurate and rapid classification. Results We present Craft ( C haos Ra ndom F ores t ), a machine learning framework for dengue subtyping. We demonstrate that Craft is capable of faster classification speeds while matching or surpassing the accuracy of existing tools. Craft achieves 99.5% accuracy on a hold-out test set and processes over 140 000 sequences per minute. Notably, Craft maintains remarkably high accuracy even when classifying sequence segments as short as 700 nucleotides. Contact danielvanzyl@sun.ac.za Supplementary information A supplemental table acknowledging the authors of the GISAID dengue sequences is available at Bioinformatics online.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".