Virus testing optimisation using Hadamard pooling
Yorke, B. A.; Beddard, G. S.
10.1101/2024.10.21.24315883 medRxivShow abstract
Pooled testing is an established strategy for efficient surveillance testing of infectious diseases with low prevalence. Pooled testing works by combining clinical samples from multiple individuals into one test, where a negative result indicates the whole pool is disease free and a positive result indicates that individual testing is needed. Here we present a straightforward and simple method for pooled testing that uses the properties of Hadamard matrices to design optimal pooling strategies. We show that this method can be used to efficiently identify positive specimens in large sample sizes by simple pattern matching, without the requirement of complex algorithms.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Mathematical modelling of SARS-CoV-2 variant outbreaks reveals their probability of extinction 93%
- A hybrid CNN-Random Forest algorithm for bacterial spore segmentation and classification in TEM images 93%
- Estimating the SARS-CoV-2 infected population fraction and the infection-to-fatality ratio: A data-driven case study based on Swedish time series data 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Low LRs obtained from DNA mixtures: On calibration and discrimination performance of probabilistic genotyping software 95%
- Analysis of the Hamiltonian Monte Carlo genotyping algorithm on PROVEDIt mixtures including a novel precision benchmark 95%
- Hamiltonian Monte Carlo with strict convergence criteria reduces run-to-run variability in forensic DNA mixture deconvolution 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Using a supervised principal components analysis for variable selection in high-dimensional datasets reduces false discovery rates 94%
- Dirichlet distribution parameter estimation with application in microbiome analyses 93%
- Using generalized additive models to analyze biomedical non-linear longitudinal data 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.