Syndromic surveillance using veterinary laboratory data: data pre-processing and algorithm performance evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diagnostic test orders to an animal laboratory were explored as a data source for monitoring trends in the incidence of clinical syndromes in cattle. Four years of real data and over 200 simulated outbreak signals were used to compare pre-processing methods that could remove temporal effects in the data, as well as temporal aberration detection algorithms that provided high sensitivity and specificity. Weekly differencing demonstrated solid performance in removing day-of-week effects, even in series with low daily counts. For aberration detection, the results indicated that no single algorithm showed performance superior to all others across the range of outbreak scenarios simulated. Exponentially weighted moving average charts and Holt-Winters exponential smoothing demonstrated complementary performance, with the latter offering an automated method to adjust to changes in the time series that will likely occur in the future. Shewhart charts provided lower sensitivity but earlier detection in some scenarios. Cumulative sum charts did not appear to add value to the system; however, the poor performance of this algorithm was attributed to characteristics of the data monitored. These findings indicate that automated monitoring aimed at early detection of temporal aberrations will likely be most effective when a range of algorithms are implemented in parallel.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".