MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404549324 · doi:10.1098/rsif.2024.0394

The 1978 English boarding school influenza outbreak: where the classic SEIR model fails

2024· article· en· W4404549324 on OpenAlexfundno aff
K. K. Avilov, Qiong Li, Lixin Lin, Haydar Demirhan, Lewi Stone, Daihai He

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Royal Society Interface · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Research CouncilNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaUniversity of AlbertaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEpidemic modelComputer scienceOutbreakAlgorithmStatisticsMathematicsDemographyBiologyPopulationVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous work has failed to fit classic SEIR epidemic models satisfactorily to the prevalence data of the famous English boarding school 1978 influenza A/H1N1 outbreak during the children’s pandemic. It is still an open question whether a biologically plausible model can fit the prevalence time series and the attack rate correctly. To construct the final model, we first used an intentionally very flexible and overfitted discrete-time epidemiologic model to learn the epidemiological features from the data. The final model was a susceptible ( S ) – exposed ( E ) – infectious ( I ) – confined-to-bed ( B ) – convalescent ( C ) – recovered ( R ) model with time delay (constant residence time) in E and I compartments and multi-stage (Erlang-distributed residence time) in B and C compartments. We simultaneously fitted the reported B and C prevalence curves as well as the attack rate (proportion of children infected during the outbreak). The non-exponential residence times were crucial for good fits. The estimates of the generation time and the basic reproductive number ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" scriptlevel="0"> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi class="mathcal" mathvariant="script">R</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>0</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:mstyle> </mml:math> ) were biologically reasonable. A simplified discrete-time model was built and fitted using the Bayesian procedure. Our work not only provided an answer to the open question, but also demonstrated an approach to constructive model generation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.597
Threshold uncertainty score0.900

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.105
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Royal Society InterfaceSame topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesFrench-language works237,207