MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2278858396 · doi:10.1017/jpr.2016.40

The SEIS model, or, the contact process with a latent stage

2016· preprint· en· W2278858396 on OpenAlex
Eric Foxall

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Probability · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStochastic processes and statistical mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsContact process (mathematics)LimitingLimit (mathematics)Convergence (economics)Latent heatStatistical physicsMathematicsEconometricsStatisticsPhysicsMathematical analysisEngineeringEconomicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The susceptible→exposed→infectious→susceptible (SEIS) model is well known in mathematical epidemiology as a model of infection in which there is a latent period between the moment of infection and the onset of infectiousness. The compartment model is well studied, but the corresponding particle system has so far received no attention. For the particle system model in one spatial dimension, we give upper and lower bounds on the critical values, prove convergence of critical values in the limit of small and large latent time, and identify a limiting process to which the SEIS model converges in the limit of large latent time.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.579

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.257 · 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