A novel COVID-19 infection-forecasting model based on artificial neural networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 surge has mostly affected people and wreaked havoc on multiple sectors of the global economy. This study uses artificial neural networks (ANN) to develop COVID-19 prediction models to minimize the perilous situation. With positive infection data, these hybrid artificial neural network models looked at COVID-19 cases in Andhra Pradesh, India. Then, COVID-19 data were divided into training and testing for simulation. The developed model that takes the previous 14 days into account outperforms the others, depending on the results. According to the developed ANN models for Andhra Pradesh districts, the prediction model that works well and yields positive results is the one that receives lower values of error metrics like MSE, RMSE, MAE, and MAPE and higher values of R2. The hybrid neural network model that considers the previous 14 days for prophecy has suggested anticipating daily positive suffering, notably in areas of Andhra Pradesh, as a result of the collected data. Linear regression, ARIMA, and LSTM have been used for model assessment. The proposed 14-day model statistically surpasses all metrics in RMSE, MAE, MAPE, and R2. This study showed that an ANN-based model can predict the COVID-19 outbreak as well as other epidemics.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".