MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4236755008 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-27139/v1

The COVID-19 Pandemic: Model-Based Evaluation of Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions and Prognoses

2020· preprint· en· W4236755008 on OpenAlexaff
Alex De Visscher

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Pandemic2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Psychological interventionVirologyMedicineComputer scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An epidemiological model for COVID-19 was developed and implemented in MATLAB/GNU Octave for use by public health practitioners, policy makers and the general public. The model distinguishes four stages in the disease: infected, sick, seriously sick, and better. The model was preliminarily parameterized based on observations of the spread of the disease. The model assumes a case mortality rate of 1.5 %. Preliminary simulations with the model indicate that concepts such as “herd immunity” and “flattening the curve” are highly misleading in the context of this virus. Public policies based on these concepts are inadequate to protect the population. Only reducing the R0 of the virus below 1 is an effective strategy for maintaining the death burden of COVID-19 within the normal range of seasonal flu. The model is illustrated with the cases of Italy, France, and Iran, and is able to describe the number of deaths as a function of time in all these cases although future projections tend to slightly overestimate the number of deaths. The case mortality rate is still prone to large uncertainty, but modeling combined with an investigation of blood donations in The Netherlands imposes a lower limit of 1 %.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
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)0.0040.000

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 head0.862
GPT teacher head0.690
Teacher spread0.172 · 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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