Bringing back the people in modelling epidemics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The emergence of COVID-19 favoured the development at Université de Montréal of an educational initiative aimed at promoting modelling and simulation in teaching and learning postsecondary mathematics. In our learning activities, modelling is not reduced to curve fitting; software is used and questions are asked to get a deeper understanding of the structure of a situation. In particular, compartmental epidemiological models were the topic of activities using digital tools (Insight Maker and Excel) that generated interest among teachers and students. With the possibilities offered by such tools of reflecting more adequately the complexity of the situation, we considered it relevant to model the perceptions related to significant effects of nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) as well as the apparent social divide in behaviours regarding mandated measures and its effect on the epidemic. A study carried out on these aspects, based on data collected in Québec, led us to develop a new model which could form the basis for a new activity and be explored and further refined by students. This work leads to considering a social dimension to the teaching of modelling with differential equations and to include this teaching in the development of critical thinking.
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 | 0.009 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".