Optimization of Infectious Disease Prevention and Control Policies Using Artificial Life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The spread of an infectious disease such as COVID-19 is governed by complex social interactions that are challenging to model. Policy makers must take measures to control the spread of infection despite the unknowns that accompany a novel epidemic. The principles of artificial life govern the intricacies of social interaction through which diseases can spread. Agent-based models can capture these complexities for a subset of the population by defining the behavior of individual agents. While they can be computationally expensive for large populations, their outcomes are stochastic. Therefore, they can be used to test disease prevention policies, that can be difficult to simulate using deterministic approaches. We developed an agent-based model that is inspired by several interactive simulations on the internet for describing the COVID-19 pandemic. We define metrics to estimate the socio-economic cost of disease prevention policies on the population. We present a policy-making tool based on blackbox optimization and evolutionary computation that provides well-rounded intervention measures in terms of socio-economic cost and disease control. Several intervention measures are suggested by the algorithms with varying degrees of disease control and socio-economic cost. Policy makers can choose an intervention measure based on their preference. This research recommends combining computational intelligence principles and the use of mathematical algorithms for identifying the critical amount of intervention necessary to control infectious diseases and formulate intervention policies that minimize socio-economic cost.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".