Recommendation Algorithm
How we evaluate and calculate the most suitable phage gene editing techniques for your project
Evaluation Criteria
Our recommendation system evaluates multiple factors to determine the most suitable phage gene editing techniques for your specific project. Each technique is scored across several dimensions:
| Criterion | Description | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| Technical Suitability | How well the technique aligns with the specific modifications needed | 30% |
| Resource Compatibility | Whether the technique can be implemented with available resources | 25% |
| Experience Level Match | Appropriateness based on user's experience with phage engineering | 15% |
| Timeline Feasibility | Whether the technique can be completed within the project timeline | 15% |
| Budget Alignment | Cost-effectiveness relative to the available budget | 10% |
| Target Bacteria Compatibility | Historical success with the specified bacterial target | 5% |
Calculation Methodology
Our algorithm calculates a weighted score for each phage editing technique based on your questionnaire responses. Here's how the process works:
Step 1: Initial Filtering
First, we filter out techniques that are fundamentally incompatible with your project requirements. For example:
- If you need to make extensive genomic modifications but a technique only supports small changes, it's filtered out
- If a technique requires specialized equipment you don't have access to, it's filtered out
- If a technique cannot be completed within your timeline constraints, it's filtered out
Step 2: Scoring Each Technique
For each remaining technique, we calculate a score for each evaluation criterion:
TechniqueTotalScore = Σ (CriterionScore × CriterionWeight)
Where:
- CriterionScore is a value between 0-100
- CriterionWeight is the percentage weight from the table above
Step 3: Ranking and Classification
Based on the total scores, techniques are ranked and classified into suitability categories:
- Very High Suitability: Score ≥ 85
- High Suitability: Score 70-84
- Medium Suitability: Score 50-69
- Low Suitability: Score < 50
Step 4: Contextual Adjustments
Final adjustments are made based on specific project contexts:
- Techniques particularly well-suited for specific modifications (e.g., Tail Fiber Engineering for host range expansion) receive bonus points for those applications
- Techniques with proven success for specific bacterial targets receive bonus points
- For beginners, techniques with lower complexity and better documentation receive bonus points
How Your Inputs Affect Recommendations
Project Type Impact
Different project types have distinct requirements that influence technique recommendations:
| Project Type | Favored Techniques | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Phage Therapy Development | CRISPR-Cas Systems, Homologous Recombination | Precision and safety are paramount for therapeutic applications |
| Diagnostic Tool Development | Reporter Gene Integration, Bacteriophage Recombineering | Reliable expression of reporter genes is critical |
| Biocontrol Application | Host Range Expansion, Tail Fiber Engineering | Targeting specific bacterial populations is essential |
| Basic Research | All techniques considered equally | Depends more on specific research questions |
| Industrial Application | Yeast-Based Assembly, In Vitro Assembly | Scalability and reproducibility are key factors |
Decision Tree Example
Here's a simplified example of how our algorithm might process a specific set of inputs:
Example Scenario
Project Type: Phage Therapy Development
Target Bacteria: Pseudomonas aeruginosa
Desired Modifications: Host Range Expansion, Enhanced Lytic Activity
Resources: Basic Molecular Biology Lab, Next-Generation Sequencing Access
Experience Level: Intermediate
Timeline: Medium-term (3-6 months)
Budget: Moderate ($10,000-$50,000)
Decision Process:
- Initial Filtering: Yeast-Based Assembly is filtered out due to lack of advanced genetic engineering facilities
- Scoring:
- CRISPR-Cas Systems: 82 points (High Suitability)
- Tail Fiber Engineering: 78 points (High Suitability)
- Bacteriophage Recombineering: 65 points (Medium Suitability)
- Homologous Recombination: 60 points (Medium Suitability)
- In Vitro Assembly: 45 points (Low Suitability)
- Contextual Adjustments:
- Tail Fiber Engineering receives +10 points for host range expansion focus
- CRISPR-Cas receives +5 points for P. aeruginosa compatibility
- Final Recommendations:
- Tail Fiber Engineering: 88 points (Very High Suitability)
- CRISPR-Cas Systems: 87 points (Very High Suitability)
- Bacteriophage Recombineering: 65 points (Medium Suitability)