Time-varying and state-dependent recovery rates in epidemiological models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Differential equation models of infectious disease have undergone many theoretical extensions that are invaluable for the evaluation of disease spread. For instance, while one traditionally uses a bilinear term to describe the incidence rate of infection, physically more realistic generalizations exist to account for effects such as the saturation of infection. However, such theoretical extensions of recovery rates in differential equation models have only started to be developed. This is despite the fact that a constant rate often does not provide a good description of the dynamics of recovery and that the recovery rate is arguably as important as the incidence rate in governing the dynamics of a system. We provide a first-principles derivation of state-dependent and time-varying recovery rates in differential equation models of infectious disease. Through this derivation, we demonstrate how to obtain time-varying and state-dependent recovery rates based on the family of Pearson distributions and a power-law distribution, respectively. For recovery rates based on the family of Pearson distributions, we show that uncertainty in skewness, in comparison to other statistical moments, is at least two times more impactful on the sensitivity of predicting an epidemic's peak. In addition, using recovery rates based on a power-law distribution, we provide a procedure to obtain state-dependent recovery rates. For such state-dependent rates, we derive a natural connection between recovery rate parameters with the mean and standard deviation of a power-law distribution, illustrating the impact that standard deviation has on the shape of an epidemic wave.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".