A Review of Network Analysis Terminology and its Application to Foot-and-Mouth Disease Modelling and Policy Development
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Livestock movements are important in spreading infectious diseases and many countries have developed regulations that require farmers to report livestock movements to authorities. This has led to the availability of large amounts of data for analysis and inclusion in computer simulation models developed to support policy formulation. Social network analysis has become increasingly popular to study and characterize the networks resulting from the movement of livestock from farm-to-farm and through other types of livestock operations. Network analysis is a powerful tool that allows one to study the relationships created among these operations, providing information on the role that they play in acquiring and spreading infectious diseases, information that is not readily available from more traditional livestock movement studies. Recent advances in the study of real-world complex networks are now being applied to veterinary epidemiology and infectious disease modelling and control. A review of the principles of network analysis and of the relevance of various complex network theories to infectious disease modelling and control is presented in this paper.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it