Back

Prediction of Coronavirus Disease (covid-19) Evolution in USA with the Model Based on the Eyring Rate Process Theory and Free Volume Concept

Hao, T.

2020-04-22 epidemiology
10.1101/2020.04.16.20068692 medRxiv
Show abstract

A modification arguing that the human movement energy may change with time is made on our previous infectious disease model, in which infectious disease transmission is considered as a sequential chemical reaction and reaction rate constants obey the Eyrings rate process theory and free volume concept. The modified model is employed to fit current covid-19 outbreak data in USA and to make predictions on the numbers of the infected, the removed and the death in the foreseeable future. Excellent fitting curves and regression quality are obtained, indicating that the model is working and the predictions may be close to reality. Our work could provide some ideas on what we may expect in the future and how we can prepare accordingly for this difficult period.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 17%
11.0%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 7%
7.9%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Infectious Disease Modelling
○ 54 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.7%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals
○ 32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.8%
Similar papers in this journal
5
The European Physical Journal Plus
○ 13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.4%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Nonlinear Dynamics
○ 10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.4%
7
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
○ 128 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.2%
8
Computational Biology and Chemistry
○ 28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.2%
9
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 10%
3.2%
10
Quantitative Biology
○ 12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.6%
50% of probability mass above
11
Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering
● 23 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.4%
12
Frontiers in Applied Mathematics and Statistics
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.4%
13
Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications
○ 13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.9%
14
PeerJ
◐ 308 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.7%
15
Biology
○ 45 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
16
Physical Review E
● 112 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.5%
17
Journal of Theoretical Biology
○ 162 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
18
Epidemics
○ 116 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
19
Mathematics
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.3%
20
Computers in Biology and Medicine
○ 128 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
21
Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology
○ 29 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
22
BMC Infectious Diseases
○ 133 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
23
Royal Society Open Science
● 214 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
24
Physical Biology
○ 46 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
25
Frontiers in Public Health
○ 148 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
26
Mathematical Biosciences
○ 49 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.1%
27
Frontiers in Physics
○ 21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.1%
28
Frontiers in Pharmacology
○ 111 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
29
Biosystems
○ 31 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.0%
30
PLOS Global Public Health
● 344 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.0%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.