Evaluating machine learning approaches for host prediction using H3 influenza genomic data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: H3 influenza A viruses (IAV) have been shown to frequently cross the species barrier which can be an important factor in sustained transmission and spread. Machine learning methods have been widely explored for host prediction of IAV using genomic data; however, this is often done using data from only one of the eight IAV segments or by using all available IAV data to predict broad categories of hosts. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to combine machine learning algorithms with H3 IAV sequence data from all eight segments to train predictive machine learning models for distinct host prediction and validate model performance. METHODS: Models were trained on both k-mers and amino acid properties alongside machine learning algorithms that included random forest and XGBoost for each of the eight IAV genome segments. Models were then validated on a test dataset through analytics of model class predicted probabilities and subsequently used to investigate between-species transmission patterns within case studies including canine H3N8, swine H3N2 2010.2, and duck H3 sequences. RESULTS: Models demonstrated strong performance in host prediction across all eight segments on the test dataset, with overall accuracies and κ (kappa) values ranging from 0.995-0.997, 0.984-0.990, respectively. Misclassified test dataset sequences with high predicted probabilities (> 90%) were validated using available literature and were identified to be frequently associated with between-species transmission events. Between-species transmission patterns within case study model class predicted probabilities were also identified to be consistent with the literature in cases of both correct and incorrect classification. CONCLUSIONS: These models allow for rapid and accurate host prediction of H3 IAV datasets from any of the eight IAV segments and provide a solid framework that allows for identification of variants with higher than typical between-species transmission potential. However, results obtained on selected case studies suggest further improvements of the training and validation processes should be considered.
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 | 0.016 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".