MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4324093654 · doi:10.3390/math11061359

COVID-19 Data Analysis Using Bayesian Models and Nonparametric Geostatistical Models

2023· article· en· W4324093654 on OpenAlex
Mayer Alvo, Jingrui Mu

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicData-Driven Disease Surveillance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPoisson distributionBayesian probabilityKrigingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)StatisticsGeostatisticsSpatial analysisEconometricsPandemicPoisson regressionSpatial dependenceCount dataComputer scienceNonparametric statisticsGeographyData miningCartographySpatial variabilityMathematicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since December 2019, many statistical spatial–temporal methods have been developed to track and predict the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this paper, we analyzed the COVID-19 dataset which includes the number of biweekly infected cases registered in Ontario from March 2020 to the end of June 2021. We made use of Bayesian Spatial–temporal models and Area-to-point (ATP) and Area-to-area (ATA) Poisson Kriging models. With the Bayesian models, spatial–temporal effects and government intervention effects on infection risk are considered while the ATP Poisson Kriging models are used to display the spread of the pandemic over space.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.564
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.216 · 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