HIV and COVID-19 co-infection: A mathematical model and optimal control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new mathematical model for COVID-19 and HIV/AIDS is considered to assess the impact of COVID-19 on HIV dynamics and vice-versa. Investigating the epidemiologic synergy between COVID-19 and HIV is important. The dynamics of the full model is driven by that of its sub-models; therefore, basic analysis of the two sub-models; HIV-only and COVID-19 only is carried out. The basic reproduction number is computed and used to prove local and global asymptotic stability of the sub-models’ disease-free and endemic equilibria. Using the fmincon function in the Optimization Toolbox of MATLAB, the model is fitted to real COVID-19 data set from South Africa. The impact of intervention measures, namely, COVID-19 and HIV prevention interventions and COVID-19 treatment are incorporated into the model using time-dependent controls. It is observed that HIV prevention measures can significantly reduce the burden of co-infections with COVID-19, while effective treatment of COVID-19 could reduce co-infections with opportunistic infections such as HIV/AIDS. In particular, the COVID-19 only prevention strategy averted about 10,500 new co-infection cases, with similar number also averted by the HIV-only prevention control.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".