Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence for the Prediction of Host–Pathogen Interactions: A Viral Case
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artur Yakimovich Artificial Intelligence for Life Sciences CIC, London, UKCorrespondence: Artur YakimovichArtificial Intelligence for Life Sciences CIC, 9 High Street, London, N8 7FJ, UKEmail ayakimovich@ails.instituteAbstract: The research of interactions between the pathogens and their hosts is key for understanding the biology of infection. Commencing on the level of individual molecules, these interactions define the behavior of infectious agents and the outcomes they elicit. Discovery of hostâpathogen interactions (HPIs) conventionally involves a stepwise laborious research process. Yet, amid the global pandemic the urge for rapid discovery acceleration through the novel computational methodologies has become ever so poignant. This review explores the challenges of HPI discovery and investigates the efforts currently undertaken to apply the latest machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) methodologies to this field. This includes applications to molecular and genetic data, as well as image and language data. Furthermore, a number of breakthroughs, obstacles, along with prospects of AI for hostâpathogen interactions (HPI), are discussed.Keywords: virus, deep learning, virus-cell interaction, sequence analysis, computer vision, natural language processing, NLP, DL
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".