Smoothing Techniques for Improving COVID-19 Time Series Forecasting Across Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate forecasting of COVID-19 case numbers is critical for timely and effective public health interventions. However, epidemiological data’s irregular and noisy nature often undermines the predictive performance. This study examines the influence of four smoothing techniques—the rolling mean, the exponentially weighted moving average, a Kalman filter, and seasonal–trend decomposition using Loess (STL)—on the forecasting accuracy of four models: LSTM, the Temporal Fusion Transformer (TFT), XGBoost, and LightGBM. Weekly case data from Ukraine, Bulgaria, Slovenia, and Greece were used to assess the models’ performance over short- (3-month) and medium-term (6-month) horizons. The results demonstrate that smoothing enhanced the models’ stability, particularly for neural architectures, and the model selection emerged as the primary driver of predictive accuracy. The LSTM and TFT models, when paired with STL or the rolling mean, outperformed the others in their short-term forecasts, while XGBoost exhibited greater robustness over longer horizons in selected countries. An ANOVA confirmed the statistically significant influence of the model type on the MAPE (p = 0.008), whereas the smoothing method alone showed no significant effect. These findings offer practical guidance for designing context-specific forecasting pipelines adapted to epidemic dynamics and variations in data quality.
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 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".