Spatial growth rate of emerging SARS-CoV-2 lineages in England, September 2020–December 2021
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper uses a robust method of spatial epidemiological analysis to assess the spatial growth rate of multiple lineages of SARS-CoV-2 in the local authority areas of England, September 2020-December 2021. Using the genomic surveillance records of the COVID-19 Genomics UK (COG-UK) Consortium, the analysis identifies a substantial (7.6-fold) difference in the average rate of spatial growth of 37 sample lineages, from the slowest (Delta AY.4.3) to the fastest (Omicron BA.1). Spatial growth of the Omicron (B.1.1.529 and BA) variant was found to be 2.81× faster than the Delta (B.1.617.2 and AY) variant and 3.76× faster than the Alpha (B.1.1.7 and Q) variant. In addition to AY.4.2 (a designated variant under investigation, VUI-21OCT-01), three Delta sublineages (AY.43, AY.98 and AY.120) were found to display a statistically faster rate of spatial growth than the parent lineage and would seem to merit further investigation. We suggest that the monitoring of spatial growth rates is a potentially valuable adjunct to outbreak response procedures for emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants in a defined population.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".