Estimating effective reproduction number using generation time versus serial interval, with application to covid-19 in the Greater Toronto Area, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
background. The effective reproduction number Re(t) is a critical measure of epidemic potential. Re(t) can be calculated in near real time using an incidence time series and the generation time distribution: the time between infection events in an infector-infectee pair. In calculating Re(t), the generation time distribution is often approximated by the serial interval distribution: the time between symptom onset in an infector-infectee pair. However, while generation time must be positive by definition, serial interval can be negative if transmission can occur before symptoms, such as in covid-19, rendering such an approximation improper in some contexts. methods. We developed a method to infer the generation time distribution from parametric definitions of the serial interval and incubation period distributions. We then compared estimates of Re(t) for covid-19 in the Greater Toronto Area of Canada using: negative-permitting versus non-negative serial interval distributions, versus the inferred generation time distribution. results. We estimated the generation time of covid-19 to be Gamma-distributed with mean 3.99 and standard deviation 2.96 days. Relative to the generation time distribution, non-negative serial interval distribution caused overestimation of Re(t) due to larger mean, while negative-permitting serial interval distribution caused underestimation of Re(t) due to larger variance. implications. Approximation of the generation time distribution of covid-19 with non-negative or negative-permitting serial interval distributions when calculating Re(t) may result in over or underestimation of transmission potential, respectively.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".