Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individual-level models (ILMs) of infectious disease spread are a system of statistical models which can be used to model infectious disease transmission through a population in discrete-time. These models allow researchers to incorporate risk factors at the individual level; thus they are suited for modeling epidemics spatially. Individuals, here, may refer to people, animals, or plants, or aggregated units such as animals on a farm or students in a school. ILMs are usually fitted to data within a Bayesian statistical framework using Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods. Ideally, covariate data and the infection status of individuals over time would be used to obtain parameter estimates for the ILMs. However, owing to various practical reasons, there are often situations in which the collection of infectious disease data at the individual level is infeasible. Instead, infectious disease data is collected at a regional level (e.g. a level which actually consists of spatially aggregated sets of individual units), such as health units or census regions. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the infectivity of such aggregated units varies as the status of infectiousness (i.e. the number/proportion of infectious individuals) within the aggregated unit changes. In the thesis, ILMs are extended to allow for time-varying susceptibility, infectivity and contact functions. A series of time-varying infectivity ILMs (TVI-ILMs) are then developed for the problem of modeling disease spread at the regional level. A method of carrying out model comparison and assessment based on the use of probability scoring rules is also developed and explored. Finally, the TVI-ILMs are extended to allow for infectivity curves that are dependent on regional-level covariates. Models and methods are tested on a combination of simulated epidemic data, and data from the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic collected in Southern Ontario.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".