Determining Anti-Curve-Flattening Behaviors for COVID-19 in the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
COVID-19 has arguably impacted every dimension of social living — be that employ- ment, schooling, healthcare or recreational activities. In a matter of months, businesses have shut down and the workforce and schools have been redirected to online work in many regions of the world. One key element of the North American pandemic response has been the emphasis that the spread or prevention of the pandemic is largely dependent on the measures taken by residents of any region. As such, our research focuses on outlining the factors that determine if an individual is less likely to take this pandemic seriously (i.e. is taking fewer measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19). We have analyzed the results of a U.S. wide COVID-impact survey using random forest classification (RFC) to associate individual demographic factors to measures taken against the pandemic such as washing/sanitizing hands. Our results indicate that the top three influential factors are household size, the number of adults living in one household and the health of the respon- dent (poor to excellent). Using these insights, we used association rules to determine key combinations of features that may lead to an apathetic response to a global pandemic in U.S. citizens, such as lower income households.
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".