Back

Pitting the Gumbel and logistic growth models against one another to model COVID-19 spread

Bekker, A.; Yoo, K.; Arashi, M.

2020-05-26 infectious diseases
10.1101/2020.05.24.20111633 medRxiv
Show abstract

In this paper, we investigate briefly the appropriateness of the widely used logistic growth curve modeling with focus on COVID-19 spread, from a data-driven perspective. Specifically, we suggest the Gumbel growth model for behaviour of COVID-19 cases in European countries in addition to the United States of America (US), for better detecting the growth and prediction. We provide a suitable fit and predict the growth of cases for some selected countries as illustration. Our contribution will stimulate the correct growth spread modeling for this pandemic outbreak.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 8%
19.2%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 4%
10.1%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Infectious Disease Modelling
○ 54 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.5%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals
○ 32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.5%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Royal Society Open Science
● 214 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
4.2%
Similar papers in this journal
6
The European Physical Journal Plus
○ 13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.4%
7
Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering
● 23 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.4%
50% of probability mass above
8
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
◐ 45 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.4%
9
Frontiers in Public Health
○ 148 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.9%
10
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 11%
2.5%
11
Nonlinear Dynamics
○ 10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.0%
12
Mathematical Biosciences
○ 49 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.8%
13
Epidemics
○ 116 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.6%
14
BMC Infectious Diseases
○ 133 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.6%
15
Cureus
○ 68 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
16
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
○ 128 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
17
Journal of Public Health
◐ 24 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.1%
18
Biology Methods and Protocols
◐ 61 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
19
Computers in Biology and Medicine
○ 128 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
20
IEEE Access
● 35 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
21
Heliyon
○ 152 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.9%
22
PeerJ
◐ 308 papers in training set
Top 12%
0.6%
23
Physical Review E
● 112 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
24
Frontiers in Medicine
○ 120 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.5%
25
Statistical Methods in Medical Research
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.5%
26
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
○ 92 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
27
Archives of Clinical and Biomedical Research
○ 28 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
28
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
○ 129 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.5%
29
JMIRx Med
◐ 32 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
30
PLOS Global Public Health
● 344 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.5%

"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.