Leveraging social media and google trends to identify waves of avian influenza outbreaks in USA and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Avian Influenza Virus (AIV) poses significant threats to the poultry industry, humans, domestic animals, and wildlife health worldwide. Monitoring this infectious disease is important for rapid and effective response to potential outbreaks. Conventional avian influenza surveillance systems have exhibited limitations in providing timely alerts for potential outbreaks. This study aimed to examine the idea of using online activity on social media, and Google searches to improve the identification of AIV in the early stage of an outbreak in a region. To this end, to evaluate the feasibility of this approach, we collected historical data on online user activities from X (formerly known as Twitter) and Google Trends and assessed the statistical correlation of activities in a region with the AIV outbreak officially reported case numbers. In order to mitigate the effect of the noisy content on the outbreak identification process, large language models were utilized to filter out the relevant online activity on X that could be indicative of an outbreak. Additionally, we conducted trend analysis on the selected internet-based data sources in terms of their timeliness and statistical significance in identifying AIV outbreaks. Moreover, we performed an ablation study using autoregsressive forecasting models to identify the contribution of X and Google Trends in predicting AIV outbreaks. The experimental findings illustrate that online activity on social media and search engine trends can detect avian influenza outbreaks, providing alerts earlier compared to official reports. This study suggests that real-time analysis of social media outlets and Google search trends can be used in avian influenza outbreak early warning systems, supporting epidemiologists and animal health professionals in informed decision-making.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".