Leveraging an epidemic–economic mathematical model to assess human responses to COVID-19 policies and disease progression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is imperative that resources are channelled towards programs that are efficient and cost effective in combating the spread of COVID-19, the disease caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This study proposed and analyzed control strategies for that purpose. We developed a mathematical disease model within an optimal control framework that allows us to investigate the best approach for curbing COVID-19 epidemic. We address the following research question: what is the role of community compliance as a measure for COVID-19 control? Analyzing the impact of community compliance of recommended guidelines by health authorities-examples, social distancing, face mask use, and sanitizing-coupled with efforts by health authorities in areas of vaccine provision and effective quarantine-showed that the best intervention in addition to implementing vaccination programs and effective quarantine measures, is the active incorporation of individuals' collective behaviours, and that resources should also be directed towards community campaigns on the importance of face mask use, social distancing, and frequent sanitizing, and any other collective activities. We also demonstrated that collective behavioral response of individuals influences the disease dynamics; implying that recommended health policy should be contextualized.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".