↓ Skip to main content

Development of a Preventive HIV Vaccine Requires Solving Inverse Problems Which Is Unattainable by Rational Vaccine Design

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
patent
9 patents

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Development of a Preventive HIV Vaccine Requires Solving Inverse Problems Which Is Unattainable by Rational Vaccine Design
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, January 2018
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2017.02009
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marc H. V. Van Regenmortel

Abstract

Hypotheses and theories are essential constituents of the scientific method. Many vaccinologists are unaware that the problems they try to solve are mostly inverse problems that consist in imagining what could bring about a desired outcome. An inverse problem starts with the result and tries to guess what are the multiple causes that could have produced it. Compared to the usual direct scientific problems that start with the causes and derive or calculate the results using deductive reasoning and known mechanisms, solving an inverse problem uses a less reliable inductive approach and requires the development of a theoretical model that may have different solutions or none at all. Unsuccessful attempts to solve inverse problems in HIV vaccinology by reductionist methods, systems biology and structure-based reverse vaccinology are described. The popular strategy known as rational vaccine design is unable to solve the multiple inverse problems faced by HIV vaccine developers. The term "rational" is derived from "rational drug design" which uses the 3D structure of a biological target for designing molecules that will selectively bind to it and inhibit its biological activity. In vaccine design, however, the word "rational" simply means that the investigator is concentrating on parts of the system for which molecular information is available. The economist and Nobel laureate Herbert Simon introduced the concept of "bounded rationality" to explain why the complexity of the world economic system makes it impossible, for instance, to predict an event like the financial crash of 2007-2008. Humans always operate under unavoidable constraints such as insufficient information, a limited capacity to process huge amounts of data and a limited amount of time available to reach a decision. Such limitations always prevent us from achieving the complete understanding and optimization of a complex system that would be needed to achieve a truly rational design process. This is why the complexity of the human immune system prevents us from rationally designing an HIV vaccine by solving inverse problems.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Student > Master 3 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Lecturer 1 4%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 5 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 4 17%
Chemical Engineering 3 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 13%
Arts and Humanities 2 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Other 5 21%
Unknown 6 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 August 2024.
All research outputs
#5,089,695
of 26,493,631 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#5,714
of 33,330 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,707
of 457,780 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#151
of 613 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,493,631 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,330 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 457,780 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 613 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.