Estimation of COVID-19 recovery and decease periods in Canada using delay model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We derive a novel model escorted by large scale compartments, based on a set of coupled delay differential equations with extensive delays, in order to estimate the incubation, recovery and decease periods of COVID-19, and more generally any infectious disease. This is possible thanks to some optimization algorithms applied to publicly available database of confirmed corona cases, recovered cases and death toll. In this purpose, we separate (1) the total cases into 14 groups corresponding to 14 incubation periods, (2) the recovered cases into 406 groups corresponding to a combination of incubation and recovery periods, and (3) the death toll into 406 groups corresponding to a combination of incubation and decease periods. In this paper, we focus on recovery and decease periods and their correlation with the incubation period. The estimated mean recovery period we obtain is 22.14 days (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 22.00-22.27), and the 90th percentile is 28.91 days (95% CI 28.71-29.13), which is in agreement with statistical supported studies. The bimodal gamma distribution reveals that there are two groups of recovered individuals with a short recovery period, mean 21.02 days (95% CI 20.92-21.12), and a long recovery period, mean 38.88 days (95% CI 38.61-39.15). Our study shows that the characteristic of the decease period and the recovery period are alike. From the bivariate analysis, we observe a high probability domain for recovered individuals with respect to incubation and recovery periods. A similar domain is obtained for deaths analyzing bivariate distribution of incubation and decease periods.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".