Characterising information gains and losses when collecting multiple epidemic model outputs

Author:

Sherratt KatharineORCID,Srivastava Ajitesh,Ainslie KylieORCID,Singh David E.ORCID,Cublier Aymar,Marinescu Maria CristinaORCID,Carretero Jesus,Cascajo Garcia AlbertoORCID,Franco NicolasORCID,Willem LanderORCID,Abrams StevenORCID,Faes ChristelORCID,Beutels PhilippeORCID,Hens NielORCID,Müller SebastianORCID,Charlton BillyORCID,Ewert RicardoORCID,Paltra SydneyORCID,Rakow ChristianORCID,Rehmann JakobORCID,Conrad TimORCID,Schütte ChristofORCID,Nagel KaiORCID,Abbott SamORCID,Grah RokORCID,Niehus ReneORCID,Prasse BastianORCID,Sandmann FrankORCID,Funk SebastianORCID

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundCollaborative comparisons and combinations of epidemic models are used as policy-relevant evidence during epidemic outbreaks. In the process of collecting multiple model projections, such collaborations may gain or lose relevant information. Typically, modellers contribute a probabilistic summary at each time-step. We compared this to directly collecting simulated trajectories. We aimed to explore information on key epidemic quantities; ensemble uncertainty; and performance against data, investigating potential to continuously gain information from a single cross-sectional collection of model results.MethodsWe compared July 2022 projections from the European COVID-19 Scenario Modelling Hub. Five modelling teams projected incidence in Belgium, the Netherlands, and Spain. We compared projections by incidence, peaks, and cumulative totals. We created a probabilistic ensemble drawn from all trajectories, and compared to ensembles from a median across each model’s quantiles, or a linear opinion pool. We measured the predictive accuracy of individual trajectories against observations, using this in a weighted ensemble. We repeated this sequentially against increasing weeks of observed data. We evaluated these ensembles to reflect performance with varying observed data.ResultsBy collecting modelled trajectories, we showed policy-relevant epidemic characteristics. Trajectories contained a right-skewed distribution well represented by an ensemble of trajectories or a linear opinion pool, but not models’ quantile intervals. Ensembles weighted by performance typically retained the range of plausible incidence over time, and in some cases narrowed this by excluding some epidemic shapes.ConclusionsWe observed several information gains from collecting modelled trajectories rather than quantile distributions, including potential for continuously updated information from a single model collection. The value of information gains and losses may vary with each collaborative effort’s aims, depending on the needs of projection users. Understanding the differing information potential of methods to collect model projections can support the accuracy, sustainability, and communication of collaborative infectious disease modelling efforts.Data availabilityAll code and data available on Github:https://github.com/covid19-forecast-hub-europe/aggregation-info-loss

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3