MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Simulating and Predicting the Active Cases and Hospitalization Considering the Second Wave of COVID-19

2021· article· en· W4200607087 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Shaon Bhatta Shuvo, Bonaventure C. Molokwu, Samaneh Rostami, Ziad Kobti, Anne Snowdon

Bibliographic record

Venue2021 IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsOutbreakCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Economic shortageMedical emergencySevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakComputer scienceMedicineOperations researchEmergency medicineDiseaseEngineeringVirologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been an ongoing threat to the world's health system. Millions of people died all over the world because of this deadly virus outbreak. Although health sectors are equipped with modern technologies yet struggling every day to control this outbreak. However, predicting the active COVID-19 cases and hospitalization in advance can be helpful to minimize the catastrophe of this persistent outbreak. This study proposed a novel Agent-based modelling (ABM) framework based on various temporal and non-pharmaceuticals parameters to predict active cases and hospitalization cases. We evaluated the model's performance based on COVID-19 data of Windsor-Essex county region of Ontario, Canada, and eventually achieved satisfactory results in predicting active cases and hospitalization. Experimental results have demonstrated that the simulations provide helpful information that could help take advanced steps to cover up for the shortage in hospital resources and take necessary steps to reduce the number of infections.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.764
Threshold uncertainty score0.781

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2021 IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC)Same topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesFrench-language works237,207