MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416753107 · doi:10.1101/2025.11.24.25340597

Expanding optimization ensemble model methods for forecasting seasonal influenza in the U.S.

2025· preprint· W4416753107 on OpenAlexafffund
Benjamin Longaou Benteke, Rhiannon Loster, Pengfei Yue, David Lyver, Christopher M. van Bommel, Edward W. Thommes, M Cojocaru

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSanofi
KeywordsSeasonal influenzaEnsemble forecastingMean squared errorEnsemble learningForecast errorConsensus forecastTerm (time)Time horizonEnsemble average

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Each year, the seasonal influenza epidemic sees significant variability in its evolution. Accurate forecasts of future influenza cases are important for planning public health responses. The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has annually organized the FluSight competition ( https://github.com/cdcepi/FluSight-forecast-hub ) to solicit forecasts from participating teams over horizons of 1, 2, and 3 weeks ahead. Using these data, the CDC produces an ensemble forecast of all submitted forecasts. In this paper, we introduce a new weight-based ensemble forecasting method to consider predicting laboratory-confirmed influenza hospital admissions for the 2024-2025 season. The method consists of determining optimal weights that are updated week-by-week throughout the FluSight competition to minimize the mean squared error (MSE) of a blend of teams’ previous forecasts compared to the truth data. Using these weights over an expanding time window starting at the beginning of the season (late Fall), we produce our own future forecasts; we call our method the expanding window optimization ensemble (EWO). To improve our method’s performance vis-a-vis the CDC ensemble model, we further introduce the Adjusted-Weights expanding window optimization ensemble (Adw-EWO) method. This new forecast is obtained by adding a correction term to the original EWO forecast, controlled by a parameter π ∈ (0, 1). We adaptively tune π to enhance forecasting performance of Adw-EWO vis-a-vis the CDC ensemble model. The correction term is computed using only the forecast errors at horizon 0 and is then applied uniformly across all forecast horizons. Our results show that the Adw-EWO method consistently outperforms the EWO across all horizons. Moreover, the Adw-EWO outperforms the CDC ensemble model at horizons 0, 1, and 2, while at horizon 3, the performance of Adw-EWO and the CDC ensemble was roughly comparable.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.459
GPT teacher head0.510
Teacher spread0.052 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies→French-language works237,207→