Extracting a COVID-19 signature from a multi-omic dataset
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The complexity of COVID-19 requires approaches that extend beyond symptom-based descriptors. Multi-omic data, combining clinical, proteomic, and metabolomic information, offer a more detailed view of disease mechanisms and biomarker discovery. Methods: As part of a large-scale Quebec initiative, we collected extensive datasets from COVID-19 positive and negative patient samples. Using a multi-view machine learning framework with ensemble methods, we integrated thousands of features across clinical, proteomic, and metabolomic domains to classify COVID-19 status. We further applied a novel feature relevance methodology to identify condensed signatures. Results: Our models achieved a balanced accuracy of 89% ± 5% despite the high-dimensional nature of the data. Feature selection yielded 12- and 50-feature signatures that improved classification accuracy by at least 3% compared to the full feature set. These signatures were both accurate and interpretable. Discussion: This work demonstrates that multi-omic integration, combined with advanced machine learning, enables the extraction of robust COVID-19 signatures from complex datasets. The condensed biomarker sets provide a practical path toward improved diagnosis and precision medicine, representing a significant advancement in COVID-19 biomarker discovery.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".