MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379880466 · doi:10.1142/s0218339023500286

GENERAL THEORY FOR SIGNIFICANCE OF CULLING IN TWO-WAY DISEASE TRANSMISSION BETWEEN HUMANS AND ANIMALS

2023· article· en· W4379880466 on OpenAlexaff
Sarita Bugalia, Jai Prakash Tripathi, Syed Abbas, Hao Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Systems · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersScience and Engineering Research BoardHuman Resource Development Group
KeywordsCullingBasic reproduction numberPer capitaPopulationDiseaseIsolation (microbiology)BiologyMortality rateDemographyEcologyMedicineBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An epidemic model is proposed to comprehend the disease dynamics between humans and animals and back to humans with a culling intervention strategy. The proposed model is separated into two cases with two different culling rates: (1) at a per-capita constant rate and (2) constant population being culled. The global asymptotic stability of equilibria is determined in terms of the basic reproduction numbers. Further, we find that the culling rate (2) considered in the model could change the dynamics by having multiple positive equilibria. Sensitivity analysis recommends developing a strategy that promotes animals’ natural and disease-related death rates. By ranking the efficacies of various intervention strategies, we obtain that vaccination in the human population, isolation and public awareness are the largely effective control interventions. Our general theory raises concerns about both human and animal populations becoming reservoirs of the disease and affecting each other dynamically.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.349
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.107 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological SystemsSame topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesFrench-language works237,207