MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886938235 · doi:10.1515/scid-2017-0001

Spatially Informed Back-Calculation for Spatio-Temporal Infectious Disease Models

2018· article· en· W2886938235 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistical Communications in Infectious Diseases · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfectious disease (medical specialty)DiseaseContext (archaeology)Computer scienceSpatial epidemiologyIncubation periodEpidemiologyStatisticsData miningEconometricsArtificial intelligenceMedicineMathematicsBiologyPathologyIncubation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In epidemiological studies, the complete history of the disease system is seldom available; for example, we rarely observe the infection times of individuals but rather dates of diagnosis/disease reporting. The method of back-calculation together with prior knowledge about the distribution of the time from the infection to the disease reporting, called the incubation period, can be used to estimate unobserved infection times. Here, we consider the use of back-calculation in the context of spatial infectious disease models, extending the method to incorporate spatial information in the back-calculation method itself. Such a method should improve the quality of the fitted model, allowing us to better identify characteristics of the disease system of interest. We show that it is possible to better infer the underlying disease dynamics via the method of spatial back-calculation.

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)0.025
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.919
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.208
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.243 · 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