A note on chain-binomial models of epidemic spread: What is wrong with the Reed-Frost formulation? (Q1092836)
From MaRDI portal
| This is the item page for this Wikibase entity, intended for internal use and editing purposes. Please use this page instead for the normal view: A note on chain-binomial models of epidemic spread: What is wrong with the Reed-Frost formulation? |
scientific article; zbMATH DE number 4020904
| Language | Label | Description | Also known as |
|---|---|---|---|
| English | A note on chain-binomial models of epidemic spread: What is wrong with the Reed-Frost formulation? |
scientific article; zbMATH DE number 4020904 |
Statements
A note on chain-binomial models of epidemic spread: What is wrong with the Reed-Frost formulation? (English)
0 references
1987
0 references
Derivations of the Reed-Frost model are analyzed in terms of the assumptions about the probabilistic process used and in terms of internal consistency. Internally consistent derivations can be exhibited but require assumptions about the basic probabilistic process that are clearly unreasonable. A properly posed, more general model is derivable through the use of \textit{P. D. En'ko}'s model (1889) and the generating function for the number of contacts per person [see \textit{K. Dietz} and \textit{D. Schenzle}, A celebration of statistics, The ISI Centen. Vol. 167- 204 (1985; Zbl 0586.92017)].
0 references
chain-binomial models of epidemic spread
0 references
Reed-Frost model
0 references
internal consistency
0 references
generating function for the number of contacts per person
0 references