A model for COVID-19 with isolation, quarantine and testing as control measures
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this article we propose a compartmental model for the dynamics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). We take into account the presence of asymptomatic infections and the main policies that have been adopted so far to contain the epidemic: isolation (or social distancing) of a portion of the population, quarantine for confirmed cases and testing. We model isolation by separating the population in two groups: one composed by key-workers that keep working during the pandemic and have a usual contact rate, and a second group consisting of people that are enforced/recommended to stay at home. We refer to quarantine as strict isolation, and it is applied to confirmed infected cases. In the proposed model, the proportion of people in isolation, the level of contact reduction and the testing rate are control parameters that can vary in time, representing policies that evolve in different stages. We obtain an explicit expression for the basic reproduction number in terms of the parameters of the disease and of the control policies. In this way we can quantify the effect that isolation and testing have in the evolution of the epidemic. We present a series of simulations to illustrate different realistic scenarios. From the expression of and the simulations we conclude that isolation (social distancing) and testing among asymptomatic cases are fundamental actions to control the epidemic, and the stricter these measures are and the sooner they are implemented, the more lives can be saved. Additionally, we show that people that remain in isolation significantly reduce their probability of contagion, so risk groups should be recommended to maintain a low contact rate during the course of the epidemic.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.295 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it