Modelling of Vaccination Strategies for Epidemics using Evolutionary Computation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Personal contact networks that represent social interactions can be used to identify who can infect whom during the spread of an epidemic. The structure of a personal contact network has great impact upon both epidemic duration and the total number of infected individuals. A vaccine, with varying degrees of success, can reduce both the length and spread of an epidemic, but in the case of a limited supply of vaccine a vaccination strategy must be chosen, and this has a significant effect on epidemic behaviour.In this study we consider four different vaccination strategies and compare their effects upon epidemic duration and spread. These are random vaccination, high degree vaccination, ring vaccination, and the base case of no vaccination. All vaccinations are applied as the epidemic progresses, as opposed to in advance. The strategies are initially applied to static personal contact networks that are known ahead of time. They are then applied to personal contact networks that are evolved as the vaccination strategy is applied. When any form of vaccination is applied, all strategies reduce both duration and spread of the epidemic. When applied to a static network, random vaccination performs poorly in terms of reducing epidemic duration in comparison to strategies that take into account connectivity of the network. However, it performs surprisingly well when applied on the evolved networks, possibly because the evolutionary algorithm is unable to take advantage of a fixed strategy.
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 | 0.000 | 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".