Papers › Audio-based AI classifiers show no evidence of improved COVID-19 screening over simple...
Audio-based AI classifiers show no evidence of improved COVID-19 screening over simple symptoms checkers
Harry Coppock, George Nicholson, Ivan Kiskin, Vasiliki Koutra, Kieran Baker, Jobie Budd, Richard Payne, Emma Karoune, David Hurley, Alexander Titcomb, Sabrina Egglestone, Ana Tendero Cañadas, Lorraine Butler, Radka Jersakova, Jonathon Mellor, Selina Patel, Tracey Thornley, Peter Diggle, Sylvia Richardson, Josef Packham, Björn W. Schuller, Davide Pigoli, Steven Gilmour, Stephen Roberts, Chris Holmes
Recent work has reported that AI classifiers trained on audio recordings can accurately predict severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARSCoV2) infection status. Here, we undertake a large scale study of audio-based deep learning classifiers, as part of the UK governments pandemic response. We collect and analyse a dataset of audio recordings from 67,842 individuals with linked metadata, including reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test outcomes, of whom 23,514 tested positive for SARS CoV 2. Subjects were recruited via the UK governments National Health Service Test-and-Trace programme and the REal-time Assessment of Community Transmission (REACT) randomised surveillance survey. In an unadjusted analysis of our dataset AI classifiers predict SARS-CoV-2 infection status with high accuracy (Receiver Operating Characteristic Area Under the Curve (ROCAUC) 0.846 [0.838, 0.854]) consistent with the findings of previous studies. However, after matching on measured confounders, such as age, gender, and self reported symptoms, our classifiers performance is much weaker (ROC-AUC 0.619 [0.594, 0.644]). Upon quantifying the utility of audio based classifiers in practical settings, we find them to be outperformed by simple predictive scores based on user reported symptoms.
In Syntology View this paper on Syntology: its repositories, every harvested function with whether it ran, its licence and the call to fetch it.
Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2212.08570")
Code
Syntology Ran 7 of 9 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 2 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 2 ran · our draft was wrong; 5 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: official repository: 9 samples from 1 repository, 7 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
9 samples harvested; 7 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 2 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-25; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 9 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from alan-turing-institute/turing-rss-health-data-lab-biomedical-acoustic-markers. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
2a80220dabcb742a · report
600ff2c45e0de056 · report
07b5a3d2cc0c0aa2 · report
de1370a2d5e42ab7 · report
4c75e29bcf8520c2 · report
77a09064753e9740 · report
c2ec4e1aa5e7224f · report
72d53618367ce071 · report
b35676336da8c1ea · report
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
1 archive method tag without a method page not shown.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections