Engineering topics

Fairchild, Geoffrey

Publications and source records attributed to Fairchild, Geoffrey.

6 records

DOE OSTI2024

Evaluating disease surveillance strategies for early outbreak detection in contact networks with varying community structure

Disease surveillance systems allow public health agencies to respond to emerging diseases before they become widespread. Developing such systems requires identifying optimal ways to monitor in the context of an epidemic outbreak; this problem is known as sensor selection. Contact networks represent the dynamics of interaction in a population and are used to model how a disease spreads in a population and to explore strategies of sensor selection. We evaluated five sensor selection strategies on their ability to provide an early warning of a COVID-like outbreak in synthetic contact networks encapsulated in four network scenarios. Three of these scenarios assessed different aspects of community structure. The fourth scenario employed a contact network representing the population and interactions of 6.8 million people in New York City, constructed from an agent-based simulation using census and transportation data. This scenario exemplifies how sensor selection strategies may perform in a real-world, urban context. Our findings suggest that the choice of the optimal strategy depends heavily on the community structure of the network. Strategies that select highly connected nodes or maximize network coverage are the optimal surveillance strategy for outbreak detection in many network community structures. However, a naive implementation of these strategies may fail to provide an early warning at all—including in the New York City scenario. Moreover, these methods are impractical for real-world use as they require knowledge of the underlying contact network. Instead, a selection strategy that starts with a set of random nodes and then performs a random walk through a chain of neighbors reliably provides early warnings without requiring prior knowledge of the network. We find this method, called “random chain”, to be the most pragmatic for implementation in a real-world disease surveillance context.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

Challenges of COVID-19 Case Forecasting in the US, 2020–2021

During the COVID-19 pandemic, forecasting COVID-19 trends to support planning and response was a priority for scientists and decision makers alike. In the United States, COVID-19 forecasting was coordinated by a large group of universities, companies, and government entities led by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the US COVID-19 Forecast Hub ( https://covid19forecasthub.org ). We evaluated approximately 9.7 million forecasts of weekly state-level COVID-19 cases for predictions 1–4 weeks into the future submitted by 24 teams from August 2020 to December 2021. We assessed coverage of central prediction intervals and weighted interval scores (WIS), adjusting for missing forecasts relative to a baseline forecast, and used a Gaussian generalized estimating equation (GEE) model to evaluate differences in skill across epidemic phases that were defined by the effective reproduction number. Overall, we found high variation in skill across individual models, with ensemble-based forecasts outperforming other approaches. Forecast skill relative to the baseline was generally higher for larger jurisdictions (e.g., states compared to counties). Over time, forecasts generally performed worst in periods of rapid changes in reported cases (either in increasing or decreasing epidemic phases) with 95% prediction interval coverage dropping below 50% during the growth phases of the winter 2020, Delta, and Omicron waves. Ideally, case forecasts could serve as a leading indicator of changes in transmission dynamics. However, while most COVID-19 case forecasts outperformed a naïve baseline model, even the most accurate case forecasts were unreliable in key phases. Further research could improve forecasts of leading indicators, like COVID-19 cases, by leveraging additional real-time data, addressing performance across phases, improving the characterization of forecast confidence, and ensuring that forecasts were coherent across spatial scales. In the meantime, it is critical for forecast users to appreciate current limitations and use a broad set of indicators to inform pandemic-related decision making.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Predictive performance of multi-model ensemble forecasts of COVID-19 across European nations

Background: Short-term forecasts of infectious disease burden can contribute to situational awareness and aid capacity planning. Based on best practice in other fields and recent insights in infectious disease epidemiology, one can maximise the predictive performance of such forecasts if multiple models are combined into an ensemble. Here, we report on the performance of ensembles in predicting COVID-19 cases and deaths across Europe between 08 March 2021 and 07 March 2022. Methods: We used open-source tools to develop a public European COVID-19 Forecast Hub. We invited groups globally to contribute weekly forecasts for COVID-19 cases and deaths reported by a standardised source for 32 countries over the next 1–4 weeks. Teams submitted forecasts from March 2021 using standardised quantiles of the predictive distribution. Each week we created an ensemble forecast, where each predictive quantile was calculated as the equally-weighted average (initially the mean and then from 26th July the median) of all individual models’ predictive quantiles. We measured the performance of each model using the relative Weighted Interval Score (WIS), comparing models’ forecast accuracy relative to all other models. We retrospectively explored alternative methods for ensemble forecasts, including weighted averages based on models’ past predictive performance. Results: Over 52 weeks, we collected forecasts from 48 unique models. We evaluated 29 models’ forecast scores in comparison to the ensemble model. We found a weekly ensemble had a consistently strong performance across countries over time. Across all horizons and locations, the ensemble performed better on relative WIS than 83% of participating models’ forecasts of incident cases (with a total N=886 predictions from 23 unique models), and 91% of participating models’ forecasts of deaths (N=763 predictions from 20 models). Across a 1–4 week time horizon, ensemble performance declined with longer forecast periods when forecasting cases, but remained stable over 4 weeks for incident death forecasts. In every forecast across 32 countries, the ensemble outperformed most contributing models when forecasting either cases or deaths, frequently outperforming all of its individual component models. Among several choices of ensemble methods we found that the most influential and best choice was to use a median average of models instead of using the mean, regardless of methods of weighting component forecast models. Conclusions: Our results support the use of combining forecasts from individual models into an ensemble in order to improve predictive performance across epidemiological targets and populations during infectious disease epidemics. Our findings further suggest that median ensemble methods yield better predictive performance more than ones based on means. Our findings also highlight that forecast consumers should place more weight on incident death forecasts than incident case forecasts at forecast horizons greater than 2 weeks. Funding: AA, BH, BL, LWa, MMa, PP, SV funded by National Institutes of Health (NIH) Grant 1R01GM109718, NSF BIG DATA Grant IIS-1633028, NSF Grant No.: OAC-1916805, NSF Expeditions in Computing Grant CCF-1918656, CCF-1917819, NSF RAPID CNS-2028004, NSF RAPID OAC-2027541, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 75D30119C05935, a grant from Google, University of Virginia Strategic Investment Fund award number SIF160, Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) under Contract No. HDTRA1-19-D-0007, and respectively Virginia Dept of Health Grant VDH-21-501-0141, VDH-21-501-0143, VDH-21-501-0147, VDH-21-501-0145, VDH-21-501-0146, VDH-21-501-0142, VDH-21-501-0148. AF, AMa, GL funded by SMIGE - Modelli statistici inferenziali per governare l'epidemia, FISR 2020-Covid-19 I Fase, FISR2020IP-00156, Codice Progetto: PRJ-0695. AM, BK, FD, FR, JK, JN, JZ, KN, MG, MR, MS, RB funded by Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Poland with grant 28/WFSN/2021 to the University of Warsaw. BRe, CPe, JLAz funded by Ministerio de Sanidad/ISCIII. BT, PG funded by PERISCOPE European H2020 project, contract number 101016233. CP, DL, EA, MC, SA funded by European Commission - Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology through the contract LC-01485746, and Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovacion y Universidades and FEDER, with the project PGC2018-095456-B-I00. DE., MGu funded by Spanish Ministry of Health / REACT-UE (FEDER). DO, GF, IMi, LC funded by Laboratory Directed Research and Development program of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) under project number 20200700ER. DS, ELR, GG, NGR, NW, YW funded by National Institutes of General Medical Sciences (R35GM119582; the content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of NIGMS or the National Institutes of Health). FB, FP funded by InPresa, Lombardy Region, Italy. HG, KS funded by European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. IV funded by Agencia de Qualitat i Avaluacio Sanitaries de Catalunya (AQuAS) through contract 2021-021OE. JDe, SMo, VP funded by Netzwerk Universitatsmedizin (NUM) project egePan (01KX2021). JPB, SH, TH funded by Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF; grant 05M18SIA). KH, MSc, YKh funded by Project SaxoCOV, funded by the German Free State of Saxony. Presentation of data, model results and simulations also funded by the NFDI4Health Task Force COVID-19 ( https://www.nfdi4health.de/task-force-covid-19-2 ) within the framework of a DFG-project (LO-342/17-1). LP, VE funded by Mathematical and Statistical modelling project (MUNI/A/1615/2020), Online platform for real-time monitoring, analysis and management of epidemic situations (MUNI/11/02202001/2020); VE also supported by RECETOX research infrastructure (Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic: LM2018121), the CETOCOEN EXCELLENCE (CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/17-043/0009632), RECETOX RI project (CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16-013/0001761). NIB funded by Health Protection Research Unit (grant code NIHR200908). SAb, SF funded by Wellcome Trust (210758/Z/18/Z).

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Nuclear Criticality Experiments Research Center Futures: A Report of a Workshop held September 6-9, 2022, Los Alamos, NM, November, 2022

Experiments and training with critical assemblies and fissionable material (at or near the critical state) that explore reactivity phenomena are central to a number of national security challenges. From fission energy to nuclear weapons to a broad suite of scientific challenges, it is clear that additional capacity and capability are needed. The National Criticality Experiments Research Center (NCERC) marked 10 years of operations in 2021. This anniversary was an opportune time to celebrate our successes and progress, and to evaluate the remaining and emergent challenges. Against this backdrop, a workshop of approximately 140 national and international leaders in nuclear research was convened in Los Alamos, New Mexico to explore “NCERC Futures.” Therefore, the present workshop focused specifically on needed capabilities and tools to meet the research challenges in eight topical mission areas served by NCERC. As each Topical Group summarized their discussions in the out brief, it was recognized that key challenges could be met through enabling infrastructure investments and new critical assemblies. Enabling infrastructure includes staffing, additional space/buildings, developing an agile bounding safety basis, the ability to keep pace with technological advances in detectors and data acquisition systems (allowing use of those with Bluetooth™ and similar technologies), an expanded set of materials options (especially plutonium), a “Plug and Play” design and implementation mindset, and a facility that enabled free-field measurements. The new critical assemblies that were identified as having the most impact were a bare plutonium (Pu) Critical Assembly, a Horizontal Split Table (HST), a Super Comet, and a Uranium Solution Burst Assembly. NECRC is a unique, one-of-a-kind facility in the United States. If all the improvements were to be made, NCERC would enable the United States and its partners to address many important research questions related to criticality. These include but are not limited to: (1) Covering the entire neutron energy spectrum for both highly enriched uranium (HEU) and Pu in configurations for virtually all conceivable applications; (2) Performing multi-physics solution experiments and irradiations with a Uranium Solution Burst Assembly, which more closely resembles actual criticality accidents; (3) Conducting free-field experiments to make basic fission physics measurements and much cleaner benchmarks with various experimental observables; and (4) Providing more training classes and more experiments annually at greater cost efficiency enabled by additional buildings and machines and an agile, bounding, risk-balanced Safety Basis. In the end, workshop attendees enthusiastically concluded that NCERC Futures are bright and the workshop helped to identify a roadmap of capability gaps that need to be addressed. This report documents the results of those efforts.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2022

National and subnational short-term forecasting of COVID-19 in Germany and Poland during early 2021

During the COVID-19 pandemic there has been a strong interest in forecasts of the short-term development of epidemiological indicators to inform decision makers. In this study we evaluate probabilistic real-time predictions of confirmed cases and deaths from COVID-19 in Germany and Poland for the period from January through April 2021. We evaluate probabilistic real-time predictions of confirmed cases and deaths from COVID-19 in Germany and Poland. These were issued by 15 different forecasting models, run by independent research teams. Moreover, we study the performance of combined ensemble forecasts. Evaluation of probabilistic forecasts is based on proper scoring rules, along with interval coverage proportions to assess calibration. The presented work is part of a pre-registered evaluation study. We find that many, though not all, models outperform a simple baseline model up to four weeks ahead for the considered targets. Ensemble methods show very good relative performance. The addressed time period is characterized by rather stable non-pharmaceutical interventions in both countries, making short-term predictions more straightforward than in previous periods. However, major trend changes in reported cases, like the rebound in cases due to the rise of the B.1.1.7 (Alpha) variant in March 2021, prove challenging to predict. Multi-model approaches can help to improve the performance of epidemiological forecasts. However, while death numbers can be predicted with some success based on current case and hospitalization data, predictability of case numbers remains low beyond quite short time horizons. Additional data sources including sequencing and mobility data, which were not extensively used in the present study, may help to improve performance.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2022

WHO FLUMART scraper

This code scrapes global influenza data that are publicly provided by the World Health Organization (WHO) through an interface called FLUMART.

Fairchild, Geoffrey↗