MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3137381400 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0241725

A stacked ensemble method for forecasting influenza-like illness visit volumes at emergency departments

2021· article· en· W3137381400 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Arthur Novaes de Amorim, Rob Deardon, Vineet Saini

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Health Services
KeywordsStaffingEnsemble forecastingReliability (semiconductor)Computer scienceInterval (graph theory)Envelope (radar)StatisticsMedicineEmergency medicineOperations researchEconometricsMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate and reliable short-term forecasts of influenza-like illness (ILI) visit volumes at emergency departments can improve staffing and resource allocation decisions within hospitals. In this paper, we developed a stacked ensemble model that averages the predictions from various competing methodologies in the current frontier for ILI-related forecasts. We also constructed a back-of-the-envelope prediction interval for the stacked ensemble, which provides a conservative characterization of the uncertainty in the stacked ensemble predictions. We assessed the accuracy and reliability of our model with 1 to 4 weeks ahead forecast targets using real-time hospital-level data on weekly ILI visit volumes during the 2012-2018 flu seasons in the Alberta Children's Hospital, located in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Our results suggest the forecasting performance of the stacked ensemble meets or exceeds the performance of the individual models over all forecast targets.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.225
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicInfluenza Virus Research Studies→French-language works237,207→