MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Bridging Compartmental Models and Network Analysis in Epidemiological Modelling

2024· article· en· W4398171322 on OpenAlexaff
Jorge M. Mendes, Helena Baptista, Ying C. MacNab

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiology and Public Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridging (networking)Computer scienceNetwork analysisHomogeneousData scienceNetwork modelSocial network analysisRendering (computer graphics)Management scienceArtificial intelligenceWorld Wide WebComputer securityMathematicsEngineeringSocial media

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the authors undertake a comparative analysis of compartmental models and network analysis as means of simulating the propagation of infectious diseases. Compartmental models operate under the assumption of homogeneous mixing, which is often a flawed assumption as individuals tend to engage in varied contact patterns based on their surrounding environments. On the other hand, social network analysis accounts for the intricate web of interpersonal connections between individuals, thereby offering a more realistic portrayal of social behaviour. However, network analysis can be computationally demanding, rendering its application in real-time epidemic modelling challenging. By conducting a series of simulations utilising the SIR model and network analysis, the authors accentuate the merits of a hybrid modelling approach that integrates the strengths of both compartmental models and network analysis while mitigating their respective limitations. Additionally, the authors suggest plausible avenues for future research.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.522
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.034 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemiology and Public Health→Same topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies→French-language works237,207→