MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051129785 · doi:10.2202/1557-4679.1171

Inference in Epidemic Models without Likelihoods

2009· article· en· W2051129785 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Biostatistics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilDirectorate for Biological Sciences
KeywordsInferenceMarkov chain Monte CarloComputer scienceMonte Carlo methodEconometricsData miningStatisticsMachine learningArtificial intelligenceMathematicsBayesian probability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Likelihood-based inference for epidemic models can be challenging, in part due to difficulties in evaluating the likelihood. The problem is particularly acute in models of large-scale outbreaks, and unobserved or partially observed data further complicates this process. Here we investigate the performance of Markov Chain Monte Carlo and Sequential Monte Carlo algorithms for parameter inference, where the routines are based on approximate likelihoods generated from model simulations. We compare our results to a gold-standard data-augmented MCMC for both complete and incomplete data. We illustrate our techniques using simulated epidemics as well as data from a recent outbreak of Ebola Haemorrhagic Fever in the Democratic Republic of Congo and discuss situations in which we think simulation-based inference may be preferable to likelihood-based inference.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.561
Threshold uncertainty score0.798

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.085
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.341 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it