Find Insights | Insight Maker

Based on the SIR (Susceptible, Infected, Recovered) model of disease, this is an upgraded model with more specifc vaeriables.

Insights:

When the growth rate and the number of the recovered is much larger than deaths, the economic activity remain steady growing.

Model of COVID-19 outbreak in Burnie Tasmania

Yini Song

3

Tugas Kelompok Teknik Pemodelan dan Simulasi

SIR Model Covid-19

Danurrizad Ryan Darmoko

13

Modelo SEIR in Covid-19

Amanda Rivera

COVID-19

ERMAKOV SEMEN

Агентное моделирование по COVID-19

Наурызбай Мерейлі

Clone of SEIR - COVID-19

Bechara Assouad

Simple SIR System Model for COVID-19_Group 4

Bryan Kovalick

This model is cloned thru an Agent-Based Modeling Simulation of "Covid-19 (ABM)_VHK" Model by Venkata Habiram Koppaka last April 2020 for presenting the Pandemic COVID-19 Disease. This ABM Simulation aims to represent the trend of COVID-19 infection and death rate (dynamics) at Puerto Princesa City, PALAWAN using the June 3, 2021 data of the CESU-PPC.

COVID-19 ABM (SIR) Model of Puerto Princesa City, PALAWAN

Alonzo S. Peralta

3

Самостоятельная Асадбека

Covid-19 in USA

Asad H

5 months ago

Covid-19 in England

Сале

12 months ago

Covid-19 Italy

Akuma

This model is to show the status of numbers of infected people, recovered people and deaths during COVID-19 in Burnie Australia. It also shows impact on the growth of economy.

Variables

The infection rate and the percentage of people washing their hands are influencing the infected number of people. Also, there are death rate and recovery rate and immunity lost rate determining the numbers of deaths, recovered and infected-again people.

for the economy growth, there are several factors, including unemployment rate, infection rate, economic growth rate and government health policy.

Perspective

After some time, people will recovered, also the economic activities.

A model of Burnie during COVID-19

Xinger Liu

Clone nyoba2 of SEIR COVID-19 New Kl. 1

Kelompok1

This insight began as a March 22nd Clone of "Italian COVID 19 outbreak control"; thanks to Gabo HN for the original insight. The following links are theirs:

Initial data from:

Italian data [link] (Mar 4)

Incubation estimation [link]

Andy Long

Northern Kentucky University

May 2nd, 2020

This is an update of our model from April 9th, 2020. As we prepare for our final exam, I read a story in The Guardian about Italy's struggle to return to normalcy. The final paragraphs:

During the debate in the Senate on Thursday, the opposition parties grilled Conte. Ex-prime minister Matteo Renzi, who has called for less restraint in the reopening, remarked, “The people in Bergamo and Brescia who are gone, those who died of the virus, if they could speak, they’d tell us to relaunch the country for them, in their honour.”

Renzi’s controversial statement was harshly criticised by doctors who warned that the spread of the disease, which, as of Thursday, had killed almost 30,000 people in the country and infected more than 205,000 [ael: my emphasis], was not over and that a misstep could take the entire country back to mid-March coronavirus levels.

“We risk a new wave of infections and outbreaks if we’re not careful,” said Tullio Prestileo, an infectious diseases specialist at Palermo’s Benefratelli Hospital. “If we don’t realise this, we could easily find ourselves back where we started. In that case, we may not have the strength to get back up again.”

I have since updated the dataset, to include total cases from February 24th to May 2nd. I went to Harvard's Covid-19 website for Italy and and then to their daily updates, available at github. I downloaded the regional csv file for May 2nd, which had regional totals (21 regions); I grabbed the column "totale_casi" and did some processing to get the daily totals from the 24th of February to the 2nd of May.

The cases I obtained in this way matched those used by Gabo HN.

The initial data they used started on March 3rd (that's the 0 point in this Insight).

You can get a good fit to the data through April 9th by choosing the following (and notice that I've short-circuited the process from the Infectious to the Dead and Recovered). I've also added the Infectious to the Total cases.

The question is: how well did we do at modeling this epidemic through May 2nd (day 60)? And how can we change the model to do a better job of capturing the outbreak from March 3rd until May 2nd?

Incubation Rate: .025

R0: 3

First Lockdown: IfThenElse(Days() == 5, 16000000, 0)

Total Lockdown: IfThenElse(Days() >= 7, 0.7,0)

(I didn't want to assume that the "Total Lockdown" wasn't leaky! So it gets successively tighter, but people are sloppy, so it simply goes to 0 exponentially, rather than completely all at once.)

deathrate: .01

recoveryrate: .03

"Death flow": [deathrate]*[Infectious]

"Recovery flow": [recoveryrate]*[Infectious]

Total Reported Cases: [Dead]+[Surviving / Survived]+[Infectious]

Resources:

* https://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/2762808/incubation-period-coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19-from-publicly-reported

Final Version of Italian COVID-19 outbreak

Andrew E Long

16

Overview:

The COVID-19 Outbreak in Burnie Tasmania shows the process of COVID-19 outbreak, the impacts of government policy on both the COVID-19 outbreak and the GDP growth in Burnie.

Assumptions:

We set some variables at fix rates, including the immunity loss rate, recovery rate, death rate, infection rate and case impact rate, as they usually depend on the individual health conditions and social activities.

It should be noticed that we set the rate of recovery, which is 0.7, is higher than that of immunity loss rate, which is 0.5, so, the number of susceptible could be reduced over time.

Adjustments: (please compare the numbers at week 52)

Step 1: Set all the variables at minimum values and simulate

results: Number of Infected – 135; Recovered – 218; Cases – 597; Death – 18,175; GDP – 10,879.

Step 2: Increase the variables of Health Policy, Quarantine, and Travel Restriction to 0.03, others keep the same as step 1, and simulate

results: Number of Infected – 166 (up); Recovered – 249 (up); Cases – 554 (down); Death – 18,077 (down); GDP – 824 (down).

So, the increase of health policy, quarantine and travel restriction will help increase recovery, decrease confirmed cases, decrease death, but also decrease GDP.

Step 3: Increase the variables of Testing Rate to 0.4, others keep the same as step 2, and simulate

results: Number of Infected – 152 (down); Recovered – 243 (down); Cases – 1022 (up); Death – 17,625 (down); GDP – 824 (same).

So, the increase of testing rate will help to increase the confirmed cases.

Step 4: Change GDP Growth Rate to 0.14, Tourism Growth Rate to 0.02, others keep the same as step 3, and simulate

results: Number of Infected – 152 (same); Recovered – 243 (same); Cases – 1022 (same); Death – 17,625 (same); GDP – 6,632 (up).

So, the increase of GDP growth rate and tourism growth rate will helps to improve the GDP in Burnie.

COVID-19 Outbreak in Burnie Tasmania - Lin Ling 523592

Lin Ling

3

Covid-19 in Italy

Bayan Zhirenbayeva

3

ABOUT THE MODEL

This is a dynamic model that shows the correlation between the health-related policies implemented by the Government in response to COVID-19 outbreak in Burnie, Tasmania, and the policies’ impact on the Economic activity of the area.

ASSUMPTIONS

The increase in the number of COVID-19 cases is directly proportional to the increase in the Government policies in the infected region. The Government policies negatively impact the economy of Burnie, Tasmania.

INTERESTING INSIGHTS

1. When the borders are closed by the government, the economy is severely affected by the decrease of revenue generated by the Civil aviation/Migration rate. As the number of COVID-19 cases increase, the number of people allowed to enter Australian borders will also decrease by the government.

2. The Economic activity sharply increases and stays in uniformity.

3. The death rate drastically decreased as we increased test rate by 90%.

COVID-19 Outbreak in Burnie Tasmania (Rajaa Sajjad, 538837)