MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3209254980 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-965234/v1

Effect of Human Mobility On The Spatial Spread of Airborne Diseases: An Epidemic Model With Indirect Transmission

2021· preprint· en· W3209254980 on OpenAlexaff
Jummy David, Sarafa A. Iyaniwura

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransmission (telecommunications)GeographyEpidemic modelEnvironmental healthComputer scienceTelecommunicationsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We extended a class of coupled PDE-ODE models for studying the spatial spread of airborne diseases by incorporating human mobility. Human populations are modeled with patches, and a Lagrangian perspective is used to keep track of individuals’ places of residence. The movement of pathogens in the air is modeled with linear diffusion and coupled to the SIR dynamics of each human population through an integral of the density of pathogen around the population patch. In the limit of fast diffusion pathogens, the method of matched asymptotic analysis is used to reduce the coupled PDE-ODE model to a nonlinear system of ODEs for the average density of pathogens in the air. The reduced system of ODEs is used to derive the basic reproduction number and the final size relation for the model. Numerical simulations of the full PDE-ODE model and the reduced system of ODEs are used to assess the impact of human mobility, together with the diffusion of pathogens on the dynamics of the disease. Results from the two models are consistent and show that human mobility significantly affects disease dynamics. In addition, we show that an increase in the diffusion rate of pathogen leads to a smaller epidemic.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.288
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies→French-language works237,207→