Research article Special Issues

Predictability of viral load dynamics in the early phases of SARS-CoV-2 through a model-based approach

  • A pipeline to evaluate the evolution of viral dynamics based on a new model-driven approach has been developed in the present study. The proposed methods exploit real data and the multiscale structure of the infection dynamics to provide robust predictions of the epidemic dynamics. We focused on viral load kinetics whose dynamical features are typically available in the symptomatic stage of the infection. Hence, the epidemiological evolution was obtained by relying on a compartmental approach characterized by a varying infection rate to estimate early-stage viral load dynamics, of which few data are available. We tested the proposed approach with real data of SARS-CoV-2 viral load kinetics collected from patients living in an Italian province. The considered database refers to early-phase infections, whose viral load kinetics have not been affected by the mass vaccination policies in Italy.

    Citation: Andrea Bondesan, Antonio Piralla, Elena Ballante, Antonino Maria Guglielmo Pitrolo, Silvia Figini, Fausto Baldanti, Mattia Zanella. Predictability of viral load dynamics in the early phases of SARS-CoV-2 through a model-based approach[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2025, 22(4): 725-743. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2025027

    Related Papers:

    [1] Yuhua Zhu . A local sensitivity and regularity analysis for the Vlasov-Poisson-Fokker-Planck system with multi-dimensional uncertainty and the spectral convergence of the stochastic Galerkin method. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2019, 14(4): 677-707. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2019027
    [2] Karoline Disser, Matthias Liero . On gradient structures for Markov chains and the passage to Wasserstein gradient flows. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2015, 10(2): 233-253. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2015.10.233
    [3] L.L. Sun, M.L. Chang . Galerkin spectral method for a multi-term time-fractional diffusion equation and an application to inverse source problem. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2023, 18(1): 212-243. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2023008
    [4] Kexin Li, Hu Chen, Shusen Xie . Error estimate of L1-ADI scheme for two-dimensional multi-term time fractional diffusion equation. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2023, 18(4): 1454-1470. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2023064
    [5] Yves Achdou, Victor Perez . Iterative strategies for solving linearized discrete mean field games systems. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2012, 7(2): 197-217. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2012.7.197
    [6] Hirotada Honda . On Kuramoto-Sakaguchi-type Fokker-Planck equation with delay. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2024, 19(1): 1-23. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2024001
    [7] Leqiang Zou, Yanzi Zhang . Efficient numerical schemes for variable-order mobile-immobile advection-dispersion equation. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2025, 20(2): 387-405. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2025018
    [8] Yin Yang, Aiguo Xiao . Dissipativity and contractivity of the second-order averaged L1 method for fractional Volterra functional differential equations. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2023, 18(2): 753-774. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2023032
    [9] Shui-Nee Chow, Xiaojing Ye, Hongyuan Zha, Haomin Zhou . Influence prediction for continuous-time information propagation on networks. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2018, 13(4): 567-583. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2018026
    [10] Ioannis Markou . Hydrodynamic limit for a Fokker-Planck equation with coefficients in Sobolev spaces. Networks and Heterogeneous Media, 2017, 12(4): 683-705. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2017028
  • A pipeline to evaluate the evolution of viral dynamics based on a new model-driven approach has been developed in the present study. The proposed methods exploit real data and the multiscale structure of the infection dynamics to provide robust predictions of the epidemic dynamics. We focused on viral load kinetics whose dynamical features are typically available in the symptomatic stage of the infection. Hence, the epidemiological evolution was obtained by relying on a compartmental approach characterized by a varying infection rate to estimate early-stage viral load dynamics, of which few data are available. We tested the proposed approach with real data of SARS-CoV-2 viral load kinetics collected from patients living in an Italian province. The considered database refers to early-phase infections, whose viral load kinetics have not been affected by the mass vaccination policies in Italy.



    In the present paper, we consider numerical solution of the time fractional Fokker-Planck equations (TFFPEs):

    {αtuΔu+p(u)+q(x,t)u=f(x,t),(x,t)Ω×(0,T],u(x,0)=u0(x),xΩ,u(x,t)=0,xΩ,t(0,T], (1.1)

    where ΩRd(d=1,2,3), x=(x1,x2,,xd), u0(x) is smooth on Ω, p:=(p1,p2,,pd) with pi:=pi(x,t)(i=1,2,,d) and q:=q(x,t) are continuous functions. αtu represents the Caputo derivative of order α(0,1). When α=1 in Eq (1.1), the corresponding equations are a class of very useful models of statistical physics to describe some practical phenomena. TFFPEs are widely used in statistical physics to describes the probability density function of position and the evolution of the velocity of a particle, see e.g., [1,2,3,4]. The TFFPEs also represent the continuous limit of a continuous time random walk with a Mittag-Leffler residence time density. For a deeper understanding of TFFPEs, we refer the readers to [5,6]. In addition, the regularity of the solutions of the TFFPE (1.1) can be found in [7].

    For the past few years, many numerical methods were used to solve the TFFPEs. For example, Deng [8] proposed an efficient predictor-corrector scheme. Vong and Wang [9] constructed a compact finite difference scheme. Mahdy [10] used two different techniques to study the approximate solution of TFFPEs, namely the fractional power series method and the new iterative method. Yang et al. [11] proposed a nonlinear finite volume format to solve the two-dimensional TFFPEs. More details can refer to [12,13,14,15]. Besides, it is difficult that analysing the convergence and stability properties of the numerical schemes for TFFPEs, when convective and diffusion terms exist at the same time. In the study of TFFPEs, the conditions imposed on p and q were somewhat restrictive. For example, for solving the one-dimensional TFFPEs, Deng [16] proved the stability and convergence under the conditions that p1 was a monotonically decreasing function and q0. Chen et al. [17] obtained the stability and convergence properties of the method with the conditions that p1 was monotone or a constant and q was a constant.

    To solve the time Caputo fractional equations, one of the keys is the treatment of the Caputo derivative, which raised challenges in both theoretical and numerical aspects. Under the initial singularity of the solutions of the equations, many numerical schemes are only proved to be of τα in temporal direction, e.g., convolution quadrature (CQ) BDF method [18], CQ Euler method [19], uniform L1 method et al. [20,21]. Here τ represents the temporal stepsize. Considering the singularity of solutions, different numerical formats were established to obtain high convergence orders, e.g., the Alikhanov scheme (originally proposed in [22]) and the L1 scheme (see e.g., [23]) by employing the graded mesh (i.e., tn=T(n/K)r,n=1,2,,K, r is mesh parameter). It was proved that the optimal convergence of those methods can be 2 and 2α iff r2/α and r(2α)/α, respectively (see e.g., [24,25,26,27,28,29]). The ¯L1 scheme studied in [30,31,32] was another high-order scheme for Caputo fractional derivative. There were also some fast schemes for Caputo fractional derivative, see [33,34,35,36]. When α was small, the grids at the beginning would become very dense. It may lead to the so-called round-off errors. Recently, taking the small α and the initial singularity into account, Li et al. [37] introduced the transformation s=tα for the time variable, and derived and analyzed the equivalent fractional differential equation. They constructed the TL1 discrete scheme, and obtained that the convergence order of the TL1 scheme is of 2α. Based on the previous research, Qin et al. [38] studied the nonlinear fractional order problem, and established the discrete fractional order Grönwall inequality. Besides, discontinuous Galerkin methods were also effective to solve the similar problems with weak singular solutions [39,40,41].

    Much of the past study of TFFPEs (i.e., in [16,17,42,43]) has been based on many restrictions on q and pi,i=1,2,,d. This reduces the versatility of the equations. In the paper, we consider the more general TFFPE (1.1), i.e., q and pi,i=1,2,,d, are variable coefficients, and q is independent of pi. We draw on the treatment of the Caputo derivative in [37], introduce variable substitution, and construct the TL1 Legendre-Galerkin spectral scheme to solve the equivalent s-fractional equation. For time discreteness, we take into account the initial singularity, and obtain that the optimal convergence order is 2α. In terms of spatial discreteness, unlike other schemes [16,17], which impose restrictions on coefficients, the Legendre-Galerkin spectral scheme does not require pi and q to be constants or to be monotonic. Besides, we obtain the following theoretical results. The order of convergence in L2-norm of the method is exponential order convergent in spatial direction and (2α)-th order convergent in the temporal direction. And the scheme is valid for equations with small parameter α.

    The structure of the paper is as follows. In Section 2, we propose the TL1 Legendre-Galerkin spectral scheme for solving TFFPEs. In Section 3, the detailed proof of our main results is presented. In Section 4, two numerical examples are given to verify our obtained theoretical results. Some conclusion remarks are shown in Section 5.

    We denote Wm,p(Ω) and ||||Wm,p(Ω) as the Sobolev space of any functions defined on Ω and the corresponding Sobolev norm, respectively, where m0 and 1p. Especially, denote L2(Ω):=W0,2(Ω) and Hm(Ω):=Wm,2(Ω). Define C0(Ω) as the space of infinitely differentiable functions which are nonzero only on a compact subset of Ω and H10(Ω) as the completion of C0(Ω). For convenience, denote ||||0:=||||L2(Ω), ||||m:=||||Hm(Ω).

    For simplicity, we suppose that Ω=(1,1)d, and u(x,t)H10(Ω)Hm(Ω) for 0tT. First of all, we introduce TL1 scheme to discrete the Caputo fractional derivative. Introducing the change of variable as follows [21,37,44]:

    t=s1/α,w(x,s)=u(x,s1/α). (2.1)

    By this, then the Caputo derivative of u(x,t) becomes

    αtu(x,t)=1Γ(1α)t0u(x,r)r1(tr)αdr=1Γ(1α)s0w(x,r)r1(s1/αr1/α)αdr=Dαsw(x,s). (2.2)

    Hence, Eq (1.1) can be rewritten as

    Dαsw(x,s)Δw+˜p(w)+˜q(x,s)w=˜f(x,s),(x,s)Ω×(0,Tα], (2.3)
    w(x,s)=0,(x,s)Ω×(0,Tα], (2.4)
    w(x,0)=u0(x),xΩ, (2.5)

    where ˜p=(˜p1,˜p2,,˜pd), ˜pd:=pd(x,s1/α),˜q:=q(x,s1/α), and ˜f(x,s)=f(x,s1/α). Let sn=Tαn/K,n=0,1,,K, and the uniform mesh on [0,Tα] with τs=snsn1. For convenience, Ki, i1 represent the positive constants independent of τs and N, where N represents polynomial degree. In addition, we define the following notations

    ˜pnd:=˜pd(x,sn),˜qn:=˜q(x,sn),˜fn:=˜f(x,sn),
    wn:=w(x,sn),˜pn:=(˜pn1,˜pn2,,˜pnd).

    Applying the TL1 approximation, we have

    Dαswn=1Γ(1α)sn0w(x,r)r1(s1/αnr1/α)αdr=1Γ(1α)nl=1wlwl1τsslsl1dr(s1/αnr1/α)α+Qn=nl=1an,nl(wlwl1)+Qn:=Dατwn+Qn. (2.6)

    Here the coefficients an,nl=1τsΓ(1α)slsl1dr(s1/αnr1/α)α, and Qn represents the truncation error. For more details, we refer to [37,38]. By Eq (2.6), then Eq (2.3) arrives at

    DατwnΔwn+˜pn(wn)+˜qnwn=˜fnQn.

    For spatial discretization, we introduce the following basis functions:

    {ψk(x)}={ψk1(x1)ψk2(x2)ψkd(xd),k1,k2,,kdIN},

    where k=(k1,k2,,kd), IN={0,1,2,,N2}. For ψki(xi),i=1,2,,d, one has

    ψki(xi)=Lki(xi)Lki+2(xi)for kiIN, (2.7)

    where {Lj(x)}Nj=0 are the Legendre orthogonal polynomials, given by the following recurrence relationship [45]:

    {(j+1)Lj+1(x)=(2j+1)xLj(x)jLj1(x)for j1,L0(x)=1,L1(x)=x. (2.8)

    Define the finite-dimensional approximation space

    XN=span{ψk(x),k1,k2,,kdIN},

    where N=(N,N,,Nd). For any function wN(x), write

    wN(x)=k1,k2,,kdINˆwkψk(x).

    By Eqs (2.7) and (2.8), we have

    wN(x)|Ω=0for wN(x)XN.

    Then, the TL1 Legendre-Galerkin spectral scheme is to seek WnXN, such that

    (DατWn,v)+(Wn,v)+(Wn,˜pnv)+(˜qnWn,v)=(˜fn,v)for vXN. (2.9)

    Here W0=πNw0, and πN is the Ritz projection operator given in Lemma 2. For instance, if d=1, we solve Eqs (2.3) and (2.4) by

    A1Dατˆwn+(A2+A3n+A4n)ˆwn=Fn, (2.10)

    where ˆwn=(ˆwn0,ˆwn1,ˆwn2,,ˆwnN2)T, A1j,h=(ψh(x),ψj(x)), j,hIN, A2j,h=(ψh(x),ψj(x)), A3nj,h=(˜pnψh(x),ψj(x)), A4nj,h=(˜qnψh(x),ψj(x)), and Fnj,1=(˜fn,ψj(x)).

    The typical solution of Eq (1.1) meets [18,46,47]

    ||ut(x,t)||0Ctα1,

    then, with the help of the changes of variable (2.1), one has (see e.g., [38])

    ||lwsl(x,s)||0C(1+s1/αl)<,l=1,2, (2.11)

    where C>0 is a constant independent of s and x. From [37, Lemma 2.2] and [38, Lemma 2.1], the solution becomes smoother at the beginning.

    Now, the convergence results of TL1 Legendre-Galerkin spectral scheme (2.9) is given as follows.

    Theorem 1. Assume that ˜q and ~pi,i=1,2,,d, in (2.3) are bounded, and that the unique solution w of Eqs (2.3) and (2.4) satisfying Eq (2.11) and w(x,s)H10(Ω)Hm(Ω). Then, there exist N0>0 and τ0>0 such that when NN0 and τsτ0, Eq (2.9) has a unique solution Wn(n=0,1,,K), which satisfies

    ||wnWn||0K(τ2αs+N1m), (2.12)

    where K>0 is a constant independent of τs and N.

    We will present the detailed proof of Theorem 1 in this section. For this, we first introduce the following several lemmas.

    Lemma 1. [37,38] For n1, we get

    0<an,n1an,n2an,0. (3.1)

    Lemma 2. If we given the Ritz projection operator πN:H10(Ω)XN by

    ((πNww),v)=0forvXN,

    then, one can get that [48]

    ||πNww||lCΩNlm||w||mforwH10(Ω)Hm(Ω)

    with dmN+1, where CΩ>0 is a constant independent of N.

    Lemma 3. [49] For any sK=Tα>0 and given nonnegative sequence {λi}K1i=0, assume that there exists a constant λ>0 independent of τs such that λK1i=0λi. Assume also that the grid function {wn|n0} satisfies

    Dατ(wn)2ni=1λni(wi)2+wn(Qn+ξ)forn1,

    where {Qn|n1} is well defined in Eq (2.6). Then, there exists a constant τs>0 such that, when τsτs,

    wj2Eα(2λsj)[w0+C1(τ2αs+ξ)]for1jK,

    where C1 is a constant and Eα(x)=k=0xkΓ(1+kα).

    We will offer the proof of Theorem 1 in this section. The projection πNwn of the exact solution wn satisfies

    (DατπNwn,v)=(πNwn,v)(πNwn,˜pnv)(˜qnπNwn,v)+(˜fn,v)(Qn,v)(Rn,v)for vXN. (3.2)

    Here Rn=Dατ(wnπNwn)Δ(wnπNwn)+˜pn(wnπNwn)+˜qn(wnπNwn), and Qn is the truncation error for approximating the fractional derivative defined in Eq (2.6).

    The error between numerical solution Wn and exact solution wn can be divided into

    ||wnWn||0||wnπNwn||0+||πNwnWn||0. (3.3)

    Let

    en:=πNwnWnfor n=0,1,,K.

    Subtracting Eq (2.9) from Eq (3.2), we get that

    (Dατen,v)=(en,v)(en,˜pnv)(˜qnen,v)(Qn,v)(Rn,v)for vXN. (3.4)

    Setting v=en in Eq (3.4), we obtain

    (Dατen,en)=(en,en)(en,˜pnen)(˜qnen,en)(Qn,en)(Rn,en). (3.5)

    By Lemma 1, we have

    (Dατen,en)=(nl=1an,nl(elel1),en)=(an,0enn1l=1(an,nl1an,nl)elan,n1e0,en)12(an,0||en||20n1l=1(an,nl1an,nl)||el||20an,n1||e0||20)=12Dατ||en||20. (3.6)

    By Cauchy-Schwartz inequality, one can obtain that

    (en,en)(en,˜pnen)(˜qnen,en)||en||20+K1|(en,en)|+K2||en||20||en||20+||en||20+K214||en||20+K2||en||20(K214+K2)||en||20. (3.7)

    Here K1=max0nK{||˜p(x,sn)||0}, and K2=max0nK{maxxΩ|˜q(x,sn)|}. Similarly, we see that

    (Qn,en)||Qn||0||en||0. (3.8)

    Noting that enXN and by Lemma 2, one has

    ((wnπNwn),en)=0.

    Then

    (Rn,en)=(Dατ(wnπNwn),en)((wnπNwn),en)((wnπNwn),pnen)(˜qn(wnπNwn),en)||Dατ(wnπNwn)||0||en||0+K1||(wnπNwn)||0||en||0+K2||wnπNwn||0||en||0CΩNm||Dατwn||m||en||0+K1CΩN1m||wn||m||en||0+K2CΩNm||wn||m||en||0K3N1m||en||0. (3.9)

    Here K3=max0nK{CΩ||Dατwn||m,K1CΩ||wn||m,K2CΩ||wn||m}, and Lemma 2 is applied. Substituting Eqs (3.6)–(3.9) into Eq (3.5), one gets

    Dατ||en||202(K214+K2)||en||20+2(||Qn||0+K3N1m)||en||0.

    Noting that e0=0 and by Lemma 3, it follows that

    ||en||04K3C1(τ2αs+N1m)Eα(4(K21/4+K2)sn).

    By Eq (3.3), we observe

    ||wnWn||0||wnπNwn||0+||en||0CΩNm||wn||m+4K3C1(τ2αs+N1m)Eα(4(K21/4+K2)sn)K(τ2αs+N1m),

    where K=max0nK{CΩ||wn||m,4K3C1Eα(4(K21/4+K2)sn)}. This completes the proof.

    In this section, two numerical examples are given to verify our theoretical results. We define the maximal L2 error and the convergence order in time, respectively, as

    e(K)=max0nK||wnWn||L2,order=log(e(K1)/e(K2))log(K2/K1). (4.1)

    Example 1. Consider the one-dimensional TFFPEs:

    αtu=uxx2ux+t2u+f(x,t),u(1,1)×(0,1], (4.2)

    where the initial-boundary conditions and the forcing term function f are choosen by the analytical solution

    u(x,t)=(t2+tα)(x3+x5)sin(πx).

    In this case, q is independent of p1, furthermore, p1 and q are not monotone functions.

    We solve this problem with the TL1 Legendre-Galerkin spectral method. Table 1 gives the maximal L2 errors, the convergence orders in time and the CPU times with N=14. The temporal convergence orders are close to 2α in Table 1. For the spatial convergence test, we set K=8192. In Figure 1, we give the errors as a function of N with α=0.3,0.5,0.7 in logarithmic scale. We can observe that the errors indicate an exponential decay.

    Table 1.  Maximal L2 errors, convergence orders in time and CPU times with N=14 for Example 1.
    α=0.1 α=0.3 α=0.5
    K e(K) order CPU(s) e(K) order CPU(s) e(K) order CPU(s)
    4 5.3660e-03 * 1.12e-02 7.5697e-03 * 9.76e-03 8.5571e-03 * 9.92e-03
    16 1.3833e-03 0.98 2.45e-02 1.1574e-03 1.35 2.19e-02 1.3367e-03 1.34 2.25e-02
    64 1.7352e-04 1.50 8.06e-02 1.3606e-04 1.54 7.53e-02 1.8311e-04 1.43 7.40e-02
    256 1.6850e-05 1.68 2.90e-01 1.4476e-05 1.62 3.00e-01 2.3859e-05 1.47 3.01e-01

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure 1.  Errors in space with α=0.3,0.5,0.7 and different N for Example 1.

    Example 2. Consider the two-dimensional TFFPEs:

    αtu=Δu+t2x2y2(ux+uy)+(2t2xy2+2t2x2y)u,u(1,1)2×(0,1], (4.3)

    where the initial-boundary conditions and the forcing term function f are choosen by the analytical solution

    u(x,y,t)=Eα(tα)sin(πx)sin(πy).

    Table 2 gives the maximal L2 errors, the convergence orders in time and the CPU times with N=14. The temporal convergence orders are close to 2α in Table 2. For the spatial convergence test, we give the errors as a function of N for α=0.3,0.5,0.7 and K=8192 in Figure 2. We use the logarithmic scale for the error-axis. Again, we observe that the errors indicate an exponential decay.

    Table 2.  Maximal L2 errors, convergence orders in time and CPU times with N=14 for Example 2.
    α=0.3 α=0.5 α=0.7
    K e(K) order CPU(s) e(K) order CPU(s) e(K) order CPU(s)
    32 7.0619e-05 * 2.08e-01 1.7386e-04 * 1.73e-01 3.1316e-04 * 1.69e-01
    256 3.3124e-06 1.47 1.34e+00 9.7836e-06 1.38 1.28e+00 2.3617e-05 1.24 1.31e+00
    2048 1.1965e-07 1.60 1.29e+01 4.6734e-07 1.46 1.28e+01 1.6199e-06 1.29 1.30e+01
    8192 1.2339e-08 1.64 8.59e+01 5.9649e-08 1.48 8.54e+01 2.6824e-07 1.30 8.83e+01

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure 2.  Errors in space with α=0.3,0.5,0.7 and different N for Example 2.

    We present a TL1 Legendre-Galerkin spectral method to solve TFFPEs in this paper. The new scheme is convergent with O(τ2αs+N1m), where τs, N and m are the time step size, the polynomial degree and the regularity of the analytical solution, respectively. In addition, this TL1 Legendre-Galerkin spectral method still holds for problems with small α and gives better numerical solutions near the initial time. The new scheme can achieve a better convergence result on a relatively sparse grid point.

    The work of Yongtao Zhou is partially supported by the NSFC (12101037) and the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2021M690322).

    The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.



    [1] L. Bolzoni, E. Bonacini, C. Soresina, M. Groppi, Time-optimal control strategies in SIR epidemic models, Math. Biosci., 292 (2017), 86–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mbs.2017.07.011 doi: 10.1016/j.mbs.2017.07.011
    [2] F. Brauer, C. Castillo-Chavez, Z. Feng, Mathematical Models in Epidemiology, in Texts in Applied Mathematics, Springer, New York, 2019.
    [3] T. Britton, F. Ball, P. Trapman, A mathematical model reveals the influence of population heterogeneity on herd immunity to SARS-CoV-2, Science, 369 (2020), 846–849. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abc6810 doi: 10.1126/science.abc6810
    [4] B. Buonomo, R. Della Marca, Effects of information-induced behavioural changes during the COVID-19 lockdowns: the case of Italy, R. Soc. Open Sci., 7 (2020), 201635. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.201635 doi: 10.1098/rsos.201635
    [5] J. Chen, H. Lu, G. Melino, S. Boccia, M. Piacentini, W. Ricciardi, et al., COVID-19 infection: the China and Italy perspectives, Cell Death Dis., 11 (2020), 438. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41419-020-2603-0 doi: 10.1038/s41419-020-2603-0
    [6] M. Gatto, E. Bertuzzo, L. Mari, S. Miccoli, L. Carraro, R. Casagrandi, et al., Spread and dynamics of the COVID-19 epidemic in Italy: effect of emergency containment measures, PNAS, 117 (2020), 10484–10491. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2004978117 doi: 10.1073/pnas.2004978117
    [7] G. Giordano, F. Blanchini, R. Bruno, P. Colaneri, A. Di Filippo, A. Di Matteo, et al., Modelling the COVID-19 epidemic and implementation of population-wide interventions in Italy, Nat. Med., 26 (2020), 855–860. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-0883-7 doi: 10.1038/s41591-020-0883-7
    [8] M. J. Keeling, L. Dyson, M. J. Tildesley, E. M. Hill, S. Moore, Comparison of the 2021 COVID-19 roadmap projections against public health data in England, Nat. Commun., 13 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-31991-0
    [9] O. Puhach, B. Meyer, I. Eckerle, SARS-CoV-2 viral load and shedding kinetics, Nat. Rev. Microbiol., 21 (2023), 147–161. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41579-022-00822-w doi: 10.1038/s41579-022-00822-w
    [10] M. Zanella, C. Bardelli, G. Dimarco, S. Deandrea, P. Perotti, M. Azzi, et al., A data-driven epidemic model with social structure for understanding the COVID-19 infection on a heavily affected Italian Province, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 31 (2023), 2533–2570. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021820252150055X doi: 10.1142/S021820252150055X
    [11] T. C. Jones, G. Biele, B. Mühlemann, T. Veith, J. Schneider, J. Beheim-Schwarzbach, et al., Estimating infectiousness throughout SARS-CoV-2 infection course, Science, 373 (2021), eabi5273. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abi5273 doi: 10.1126/science.abi5273
    [12] H. Lu, F. Giannino, D. M. Tartakovsky, Parsimonious models of in-host viral dynamics and immune response, Appl. Math. Lett., 145 (2023), 108781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aml.2023.108781 doi: 10.1016/j.aml.2023.108781
    [13] G. Bertaglia, L. Pareschi, G. Toscani, Modelling contagious viral dynamics: a kinetic approach based on mutual utility, Math. Biosci. Eng., 21 (2024), 4241–4268. https://doi.org/10.3934/mbe.2024187 doi: 10.3934/mbe.2024187
    [14] J. K. Frediani, R. Parsons, K. B. McLendon, A. L. Westbrook, W. Lam, G. Martin, et al., The new normal: delayed peak SARS-CoV-2 viral loads relative to symptom onset and implications for COVID-19 testing programs, Clin. Infect. Dis., 78 (2024), 301–307. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciad582 doi: 10.1093/cid/ciad582
    [15] O. Puhach, K. Adea, N. Hulo, P. Sattonnet, C. Genecand, A. Iten, et al., Infectious viral load in unvaccinated and vaccinated individuals infected with ancestral, Delta or Omicron SARS-CoV-2, Nat. Med., 28 (2022), 1491–1500. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-022-01816-0 doi: 10.1038/s41591-022-01816-0
    [16] R. Verity, L. C. Okell, I. Dorigatti, P. Winskill, C. Whittaker, N. Imai, et al., Estimates of the severity of coronavirus disease 2019: a model-based analysis, Lancet Infect. Dis., 20 (2020), 669–677. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30243-7 doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30243-7
    [17] X. He, E. H. Y. Lau, P. Wu, X. Deng, J. Wang, X. Hao, et al., Temporal dynamics in viral shedding and transmissibility of COVID-19, Nat. Med., 26 (2020), 672–675. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-0869-5 doi: 10.1038/s41591-020-0869-5
    [18] E. Kharazmi, M. Cai, X. Zheng, Z. Zhang, G. Lin, G. E. Karniadakis, Identifiability and predictability of integer- and fractional-order epidemiological models using physics-informed neural networks, Nature Comput. Sci., 1 (2021), 744–753. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43588-021-00158-0 doi: 10.1038/s43588-021-00158-0
    [19] R. Della Marca, N. Loy, A. Tosin, An SIR model with viral load-dependent transmission, J. Math. Biol., 86 (2023), 61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-023-01901-z doi: 10.1007/s00285-023-01901-z
    [20] N. Loy, A. Tosin, A viral load-based model for epidemic spread on spatial networks, Math. Biosci. Eng., 18 (2021), 5635–5663. https://doi.org/10.3934/mbe.2021285 doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021285
    [21] G. Bertaglia, A. Bondesan, D. Burini, R. Eftimie, L. Pareschi, G. Toscani, New trends on the systems approach to modeling SARS-CoV-2 pandemics in a globally connected planet, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 34 (2024), 1995–2054. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218202524500301 doi: 10.1142/S0218202524500301
    [22] G. Bertaglia, W. Boscheri, G. Dimarco, L. Pareschi, Spatial spread of COVID-19 outbreak in Italy using multiscale kinetic transport equations with uncertainty, Math. Biosci. Eng., 18 (2021), 7028–7059. https://doi.org/10.3934/mbe.2021350 doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021350
    [23] A. Bondesan, G. Toscani, M. Zanella, Kinetic compartmental models driven by opinion dynamics: Vaccine hesitancy and social influence, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 34 (2024), 1043–1076. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218202524400062 doi: 10.1142/S0218202524400062
    [24] G. Dimarco, B. Perthame, G. Toscani, M. Zanella, Kinetic models for epidemic dynamics with social heterogeneity, J. Math. Biol., 83 (2021), 4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-021-01630-1 doi: 10.1007/s00285-021-01630-1
    [25] J. Franceschi, A. Medaglia, M. Zanella, On the optimal control of kinetic epidemic models with uncertain social features, Optim. Contr. Appl. Meth., 45 (2024), 494–522. https://doi.org/10.1002/oca.3029 doi: 10.1002/oca.3029
    [26] M. Zanella, Kinetic models for epidemic dynamics in the presence of opinion polarization, Bull. Math. Biol., 85 (2023), 36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-023-01147-2 doi: 10.1007/s11538-023-01147-2
    [27] J. Demongeot, Q. Griette, Y. Maday, P. Magal, A Kermack–McKendrick model with age of infection starting from a single or multiple cohorts of infected patients, Proc. R. Soc. A, 479 (2023), 20220381. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2022.0381 doi: 10.1098/rspa.2022.0381
    [28] J. Y. Yang, F. Q. Zhang, X. Y. Wang, SIV epidemic models with age of infection, Int. J. Biomath., 2 (2009), 61–67. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793524509000492 doi: 10.1142/S1793524509000492
    [29] A. Piralla, C. Daleno, E. Pariani, P. Conaldi, S. Esposito, A. Zanetti, et al., Virtual quantification of influenza A virus load by real-time RT-PCR, J. Clin. Virol., 56 (2013), 65–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2012.09.011 doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2012.09.011
    [30] A. Piralla, A. Girello, M. Premoli, F. Baldanti, A new real-time reverse transcription-PCR assay for detection of human enterovirus 68 in respiratory samples, J. Clin. Microbiol., 53 (2015), 1725–1726. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.03691-14 doi: 10.1128/JCM.03691-14
    [31] M. Cevik, K. Kuppalli, J. Kindrachuk, M. Peiris, Virology, transmission, and pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2, BMJ, 371 (2020), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3862 doi: 10.1136/bmj.m3862
    [32] O. Diekmann, J. A. P. Heesterbeek, Mathematical Epidemiology of Infectious Diseases: Model Building, Analysis and Interpretation, Wiley, 2000.
    [33] G. Albi, L. Pareschi, M. Zanella, Control with uncertain data of socially structured compartmental epidemic models, J. Math. Biol., 82 (2021), 63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-021-01617-y doi: 10.1007/s00285-021-01617-y
    [34] B. Bartélemy, A. Barrat, R. Pastor-Satorras, A. Vespignani, Dynamical patterns of epidemic outbreaks in complex heterogeneous networks, J. Theor. Biol., 235 (2005), 275–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2005.01.011 doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2005.01.011
    [35] V. Capasso, G. Serio, A generalization of the Kermack–McKendrick deterministic epidemic model, Math. Biosci., 42 (1978), 43–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-5564(78)90006-8 doi: 10.1016/0025-5564(78)90006-8
    [36] J. Dolbeault, G. Turinici, Heterogeneous social interactions and the COVID-19 lockdown outcome in a multi-group SEIR model, Math. Model. Net. Pheno., 15 (2020), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1051/mmnp/2020025 doi: 10.1051/mmnp/2020025
    [37] M. Mozgovoj, M. D. Graham, C. Ferrufino, S. Blanc, A. F. Souto, M. Pilloff, et al., Viral load in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. What have we learned?, J. Clin. Virol. Plus, 3 (2023), 100166.
    [38] M. A. Capistrán, J. A. Christen, J. X. Velasco-Hernández, Towards uncertainty quantification and inference in the stochastic SIR epidemic model, Math. Biosci., 240 (2012), 250–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mbs.2012.08.005 doi: 10.1016/j.mbs.2012.08.005
    [39] G. Chowell, Fitting dynamic models to epidemic outbreaks with quantified uncertainty: a primer for parameter uncertainty, identifiability, and forecasts, Infect. Dis. Model., 2 (2017), 379–398.
    [40] M. G. Roberts, Epidemic models with uncertainty in the reproduction number, J. Math. Biol., 66 (2013), 1463–1474. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-012-0540-y doi: 10.1007/s00285-012-0540-y
    [41] S. Jin, L. Pareschi, Uncertainty Quantification for Hyperbolic and Kinetic Equations, SEMA-SIMAI Springer Series, 2017.
    [42] L. Pareschi, An introduction to uncertainty quantification for kinetic equations and related problems, in Trails in Kinetic Theory: Foundational Aspects and Numerical Methods (eds. G. Albi, S. Merino-Aceituno, A. Nota, M. Zanella), SEMA-SIMAI Springer Series, 25 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-67104-4
    [43] D. Xiu, Numerical Methods for Stochastic Computations: a Spectral Methods Approach, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2010.
    [44] N. Guglielmi, E. Iacomini, A. Viguerie, Identification of time delays in COVID-19 data, Epidemiol. Meth., 12 (2023), 20220117. https://doi.org/10.1515/em-2022-0117 doi: 10.1515/em-2022-0117
    [45] E. Lavezzo, E. Franchin, C. Ciavarella, G. Cuomo-Dannenburg, L. Barzon, C. Del Vecchio, et al., Suppression of a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in the Italian municipality of Vo', Nature, 584 (2020), 425–429. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2488-1 doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2488-1
    [46] B. La Scola, M. Le Bideau, J. Andreani, V. T. Hoang, C. Grimaldier, P. Colson, et al., Viral RNA load as determined by cell culture as a management tool for discharge of SARS-CoV-2 patients from infectious disease wards, Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis., 39 (2020), 1059–1061. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-020-03913-9 doi: 10.1007/s10096-020-03913-9
    [47] A. Singanayagam, M. Patel, A. Charlett, J. L. Bernal, V. Saliba, J. Ellis, et al., Duration of infectiousness and correlation with RT-PCR cycle threshold values in cases of COVID-19, England, January to May 2020, Eurosurveillance, 25 (2020), 2001483.
    [48] A. Piralla, M. Ricchi, M. G. Cusi, P. Prati, N. Vicari, G. Scarsi, et al., Residual SARS-CoV-2 RNA in nasal swabs of convalescent COVID-19 patients: Is prolonged quarantine always justified?, IJID, 102 (2021), 299–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.10.072 doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2020.10.072
    [49] M. J. Keeling, S. Moore, B. S. Penman, E. M. Hill, The impacts of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose separation and targeting on the COVID-19 epidemic in England, Nat. Commun., 14 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-35943-0
    [50] Y. Liu, L. M. Yan, L. Wan, T. X. Xiang, A. Le, J. M. Liu, et al., Viral dynamics in mild and severe cases of COVID-19, Lancet Infect. Dis., 20 (2020), 656–657. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30232-2 doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30232-2
    [51] A. Medaglia, G. Colelli, L. Farina, A. Bacila, P. Bini, E. Marchioni, et al., Uncertainty quantification and control of kinetic models of tumour growth under clinical uncertainties, Int. J. NonLin. Mech., 141 (2022), 103933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2022.103933 doi: 10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2022.103933
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Yanping Chen, Jixiao Guo, Unconditional error analysis of the linearized transformed L1 virtual element method for nonlinear coupled time-fractional Schrödinger equations, 2025, 457, 03770427, 116283, 10.1016/j.cam.2024.116283
    2. Yongtao Zhou, Mingzhu Li, Error estimate of a transformed L1 scheme for a multi-term time-fractional diffusion equation by using discrete comparison principle, 2024, 217, 03784754, 395, 10.1016/j.matcom.2023.11.010
    3. Asghar Ali, Jamshad Ahmad, Sara Javed, Rashida Hussain, Mohammed Kbiri Alaoui, Muhammad Aqeel, Numerical simulation and investigation of soliton solutions and chaotic behavior to a stochastic nonlinear Schrödinger model with a random potential, 2024, 19, 1932-6203, e0296678, 10.1371/journal.pone.0296678
    4. Zemian Zhang, Yanping Chen, Yunqing Huang, Jian Huang, Yanping Zhou, A continuous Petrov–Galerkin method for time-fractional Fokker–Planck equation, 2025, 03770427, 116689, 10.1016/j.cam.2025.116689
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2025 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(758) PDF downloads(53) Cited by(2)

Figures and Tables

Figures(6)  /  Tables(3)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog