Ensemble learning methods of inference for spatially stratified infectious disease systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individual level models are a class of mechanistic models that are widely used to infer infectious disease transmission dynamics. These models incorporate individual level covariate information accounting for population heterogeneity and are generally fitted in a Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) framework. However, Bayesian MCMC methods of inference are computationally expensive for large data sets. This issue becomes more severe when applied to infectious disease data collected from spatially heterogeneous populations, as the number of covariates increases. In addition, summary statistics over the global population may not capture the true spatio-temporal dynamics of disease transmission. In this study we propose to use ensemble learning methods to predict epidemic generating models instead of time consuming Bayesian MCMC method. We apply these methods to infer disease transmission dynamics over spatially clustered populations, considering the clusters as natural strata instead of a global population. We compare the performance of two tree-based ensemble learning techniques: random forest and gradient boosting. These methods are applied to the 2001 foot-and-mouth disease epidemic in the U.K. and evaluated using simulated data from a clustered population. It is shown that the spatially clustered data can help to predict epidemic generating models more accurately than the global data.
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 | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".