Adaptive data-driven age and patch mixing in contact networks with recurrent mobility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Infectious disease transmission models often stratify populations by age and geographic patches. Contact patterns between age groups and patches are key parameters in such models. Arenas et al. (2020) develop an approach to simulate contact patterns associated with recurrent mobility between patches, such as due to work, school, and other regular travel. Using their approach, mixing between patches is greater than mobility data alone would suggest, because individuals from patches A and B can form contacts if they meet in patch C. We build upon their approach to address three potential gaps that remain, outlined in the bullets below. We describe the steps required to implement our approach in detail, and present step-wise results of an example application to generate contact matrices for SARS-CoV-2 transmission modelling in Ontario, Canada. We also provide methods for deriving the mobility matrix based on GPS mobility data (appendix).•Our approach includes a distribution of contacts by age that is responsive to the underlying age distributions of the mixing populations.•Our approach maintains different age mixing patterns by contact type, such that changes to the numbers of different types of contacts are appropriately reflected in changes to overall age mixing patterns.•Our approach distinguishes between two mixing pools associated with each patch, with possible implications for the overall connectivity of the population: the home pool, in which contacts can only be formed with other individuals residing in the same patch, and the travel pool, in which contacts can be formed with some residents of, and any other visitors to the patch.
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 | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".