Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Weird Way to update the Infection Status of SI model #227

Closed
FeynmanDNA opened this issue Feb 2, 2022 · 5 comments
Closed

Weird Way to update the Infection Status of SI model #227

FeynmanDNA opened this issue Feb 2, 2022 · 5 comments

Comments

@FeynmanDNA
Copy link

in ndlib/models/epidemics/SEISModel.py, in the commit f80b144#diff-81ae80e5ab1d17420f19b47e51b93b8999cee1ad70db53e2aff5309ad3cd8899
the beta * num_infected_neighbors was changed into a 1 - (1-beta)**num_infected_neighbors.

I am wondering why was there such a change in the formula? The probability of beta should be linearly scaled with the number of infected neighbors right? Thanks for the hard work!

@FeynmanDNA
Copy link
Author

Hi i went through the past issues and discovered that this beta vs num_infected_neighbors have been discussed before

But I kind of agree with #96 (comment)
the beta is probability of getting the infection per I->S link right?

If we adopt the 1 - (1-beta)**num_infected_neighbors, then what is the definition of beta?
thanks!

@GiulioRossetti
Copy link
Owner

It is not weird at all.

This is the probability of getting infected considering multiple independent contacts with infected individuals (each contact with prob beta of passing the infection).

@FeynmanDNA
Copy link
Author

i see.

but is the previous approach linearly scaling the beta with num of infected neighbors wrong? Quite a number of publications use that calculation method, for example your 2018 publication "Diffusive Phenomena in Dynamic Networks: A Data-Driven Study":
image

@GiulioRossetti
Copy link
Owner

GiulioRossetti commented Feb 3, 2022

That's likely a typo.

Let's say that a linear scaling is not correct because it doesn't guarantee that the final probably value lies in [0,1]. Moreover, it doesn't model the independence of multiple infection sources.

@FeynmanDNA
Copy link
Author

i see. thank you very much for the clarification!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants