Learning transmission dynamics modelling of COVID-19 using comomodels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 epidemic continues to rage in many parts of the world. In the UK alone, an array of mathematical models have played a prominent role in guiding policymaking. Whilst considerable pedagogical material exists for understanding the basics of transmission dynamics modelling, there is a substantial gap between the relatively simple models used for exposition of the theory and those used in practice to model the transmission dynamics of COVID-19. Understanding these models requires considerable prerequisite knowledge and presents challenges to those new to the field of epidemiological modelling. In this paper, we introduce an open-source R package, comomodels, which can be used to understand the complexities of modelling the transmission dynamics of COVID-19 through a series of differential equation models. Alongside the base package, we describe a host of learning resources, including detailed tutorials and an interactive web-based interface allowing dynamic investigation of the model properties. We then use comomodels to illustrate three key lessons in the transmission of COVID-19 within R Markdown vignettes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".