MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415144808 · doi:10.3934/math.20251030

Accurate approximation of solutions of infectious disease models with interventions

2025· article· en· W4415144808 on OpenAlexaff
W. H. Enright, Christina C. Christara, Paul Muir

Bibliographic record

VenueAIMS Mathematics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology Models
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOdeOrdinary differential equationClassification of discontinuitiesPsychological interventionDifferential equationMathematical modelInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 epidemic there has been an intensive global research effort devoted to the study of the virus and in particular to the development of mathematical models of COVID-19 that involve systems of ordinary differential equations (ODEs). In this paper, we consider systems of ODEs rising from an SEIR epidemic model with interventions. The impact of these interventions is that the solution to the model is nonsmooth at the points in time where the interventions are introduced or removed. This problem is sufficiently challenging that standard ODE solvers are not able to obtain numerical solutions of these models that have even moderate accuracy. However, we show in this paper that dramatic improvements in the accuracy and reliability of approximate solutions of this model can be obtained by employing carefully chosen, robust, numerical ODE methods. In particular, we consider an algorithm that can automatically detect, and efficiently and accurately handle the discontinuities that arise when the model includes interventions that are imposed in an attempt to restrict the spread of the virus and later removed when the spread of the virus is diminished.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIMS MathematicsSame topicMathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology ModelsFrench-language works237,207