Figure 2. Comparison of estimation results between the conventional and new methods for epidemiological parameters (IMAGE)
Caption
(a) Both methods accurately fit the number of cumulative confirmed cases. (b) However, when estimating the reproduction number (R), the new method accurately captured the value calculated from real contact tracing data (indicated by the dotted line), while the conventional method overestimated the value by nearly twofold. (c) Furthermore, the new method was able to estimate the shape of the infectious period distribution, which is not possible with the conventional method.
Credit
Institute for Basic Science
Usage Restrictions
Attribution Required
License
Original content