Optimizing the response to surveillance alerts in automated surveillance systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although much research effort has been directed toward refining algorithms for disease outbreak alerting, considerably less attention has been given to the response to alerts generated from statistical detection algorithms. Given the inherent inaccuracy in alerting, it is imperative to develop methods that help public health personnel identify optimal policies in response to alerts. This study evaluates the application of dynamic decision making models to the problem of responding to outbreak detection methods, using anthrax surveillance as an example. Adaptive optimization through approximate dynamic programming is used to generate a policy for decision making following outbreak detection. We investigate the degree to which the model can tolerate noise theoretically, in order to keep near optimal behavior. We also evaluate the policy from our model empirically and compare it with current approaches in routine public health practice for investigating alerts. Timeliness of outbreak confirmation and total costs associated with the decisions made are used as performance measures. Using our approach, on average, 80 per cent of outbreaks were confirmed prior to the fifth day of post-attack with considerably less cost compared to response strategies currently in use. Experimental results are also provided to illustrate the robustness of the adaptive optimization approach and to show the realization of the derived error bounds in practice.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".