A framework for incorporating behavioural change into individual‐level spatial epidemic models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Epidemic trajectories can be substantially impacted by people modifying their behaviours in response to changes in their perceived risk of spreading or contracting the disease. However, most infectious disease models assume a stable population behaviour. We present a flexible new class of models, called behavioural change individual‐level models (BC‐ILMs), that incorporate both individual‐level covariate information and a data‐driven behavioural change effect. Focusing on spatial BC‐ILMs, we consider four “alarm” functions to model the effect of behavioural change as a function of infection prevalence over time. Through simulation studies, we find that if behavioural change is present, using an alarm function, even if specified incorrectly, will result in an improvement in posterior predictive performance over a model that assumes stable population behaviour. The methods are applied to data from the 2001 U.K. foot and mouth disease epidemic. The results show some evidence of a behavioural change effect, although it may not meaningfully impact model fit compared to a simpler spatial ILM in this dataset.
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 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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".