Determination of COVID-19 parameters for an agent-based model: Easing or tightening control strategies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Different agent-based models have been developed to estimate the spread progression of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to evaluate different control strategies to control outbreak of the infectious disease. While there are several estimation methods for the disease-specific parameters of COVID-19, they have been used for aggregate level models such as SIR and not for agent-based models. We propose a mathematical structure to determine parameter values of agent-based models considering the mutual effects of parameters. Then, we assess the extent to which different control strategies can intervene the transmission of COVID-19. Accordingly, we consider scenarios of easing social distancing restrictions, opening businesses, speed of enforcing control strategies and quarantining family members of isolated cases on the disease progression. We find the social distancing compliance level in the Sydney greater metropolitan area to be around 85%. Then we elaborate on consequences of easing the compliance level in the disease suppression. We also show that tight social distancing levels should be considered when the restrictions on businesses and activity participations are easing.
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 | 0.002 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".