Explaining COVID-19 outbreaks with reactive SEIRD models

  1. Kunal Menda
  2. Lucas Laird
  3. Mykel J. Kochenderfer
  4. Rajmonda S. Caceres

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

COVID-19 epidemics have varied dramatically in nature across the United States, where some counties have clear peaks in infections, and others have had a multitude of unpredictable and non-distinct peaks. Our lack of understanding of how the pandemic has evolved leads to increasing errors in our ability to predict the spread of the disease. This work seeks to explain this diversity in epidemic progressions by considering an extension to the compartmental SEIRD model. The model we propose uses a neural network to predict the infection rate as a function of both time and the disease’s prevalence. We provide a methodology for fitting this model to available county-level data describing aggregate cases and deaths. Our method uses Expectation-Maximization to overcome the challenge of partial observability, due to the fact that the system’s state is only partially reflected in available data. We fit a single model to data from multiple counties in the United States exhibiting different behavior. By simulating the model, we show that it can exhibit both single peak and multi-peak behavior, reproducing behavior observed in counties both in and out of the training set. We then compare the error of simulations from our model with a standard SEIRD model, and show that ours substantially reduces errors. We also use simulated data to compare our methodology for handling partial observability with a standard approach, showing that ours is significantly better at estimating the values of unobserved quantities.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.02.09.21251440: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1038/s41598-021-97260-0
  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.02.09.21251440 on medRxiv