The Nobel laureate Niels Bohr once said that: “Predictions are very difficult, especially if they are about the future”. Nonetheless, models that can forecast future COVID-19 outbreaks are receiving special attention by policymakers and health authorities, with the aim of putting in place control measures before the infections begin to increase. Nonetheless, two main problems emerge. First, there is no a general agreement on which kind of data should be registered for judging on the resurgence of the virus (e.g., infections, deaths, percentage of hospitalizations, reports from clinicians, signals from social media). Not only this, but all these data also suffer from common defects, linked to their reporting delays and to the uncertainties in the collection process. Second, the complex nature of COVID-19 outbreaks makes it difficult to understand if traditional epidemiological models, such as susceptible, infectious, or recovered (SIR), are more effective for a timely prediction of an outbreak than alternative computational models. Well aware of the complexity of this forecasting problem, we propose here an innovative metric for predicting COVID-19 diffusion based on the hypothesis that a relation exists between the spread of the virus and the presence in the air of particulate pollutants, such as PM2.5, PM10, and NO2. Drawing on the recent assumption of 239 experts who claimed that this virus can be airborne, and further considering that particulate matter may favor this airborne route, we developed a machine learning (ML) model that has been instructed with: (i) all the COVID-19 infections that occurred in the Italian region of Emilia-Romagna, one of the most polluted areas in Europe, in the period of February–July 2020, (ii) the daily values of all the particulates taken in the same period and in the same region, and finally (iii) the chronology according to which restrictions were imposed by the Italian Government to human activities. Our ML model was then subjected to a classic ten-fold cross-validation procedure that returned a promising 90% accuracy value. Finally, the model was used to predict a possible resurgence of the virus in all the nine provinces of Emilia-Romagna, in the period of September–December 2020. To make those predictions, input to our ML model were the daily measurements of the aforementioned pollutants registered in the periods of September–December 2017/2018/2019, along with the hypothesis that the mild containment measures taken in Italy in the so-called Phase 3 are obeyed. At the time we write this article, we cannot have a confirmation of the precision of our predictions. Nevertheless, we are projecting a scenario based on an original hypothesis that makes our COVID-19 prediction model unique in the world. Its accuracy will be soon judged by history—and this, too, is science at the service of society.
If modern artificial intelligence (AI) comes often misunderstood, this is mainly due to the fact that, historically, it is solely tied to the way human brains work and think. New machine learning (ML) algorithms, instead, learn now by processing massive piles of data. This process enables machines to adapt to real-world situations, as well as to propose suggestions on how to classify and interpret a variety of different real phenomena. Simply speaking, the deployment of modern ML systems into critical applications is directly influenced by the way training data are organized and modeled [1-3]. Hence, while those modern algorithms rapidly sift through huge datasets, loaded with millions of information, a thoughtfully designed AI, beyond its ML-based core, should never disregard the fact that algorithms that learn are, for now, just another form of machine instruction, still guided and influenced by the potential and the limitations that training data carry with them. In other words, even when we train algorithms to learn basic associations that can then be used to approximate,
As we prepare to emerge from an extensive and unprecedented lockdown period, due to the COVID-19 virus infection that hit the Northern regions of Italy with the Europe’s highest death toll, it becomes clear that what has gone wrong rests upon a combination of demographic, healthcare, political, business, organizational, and climatic factors that are out of our scientific scope. Nonetheless, looking at this problem from a patient’s perspective, it is indisputable that risk factors, considered as associated with the development of the virus disease, include older age, history of smoking, hypertension and heart disease. While several studies have already shown that many of these diseases can also be favored by a protracted exposure to air pollution, there has been recently an insurgence of negative commentary against authors who have correlated the fatal consequences of COVID-19 (also) to the exposition of specific air pollutants. Well aware that understanding the real connection between the spread of this fatal virus and air pollutants would require many other investigations at a level appropriate to the scale of this phenomenon (e.g., biological, chemical, and physical), we propose the results of a study, where a series of the measures of the daily values of PM2.5, PM10, and NO2 were considered over time, while the Granger causality statistical hypothesis test was used for determining the presence of a possible correlation with the series of the new daily COVID19 infections, in the period February–April 2020, in Emilia-Romagna. Results taken both before and after the governmental lockdown decisions show a clear correlation, although strictly seen from a Granger causality perspective. Moving beyond the relevance of our results towards the real extent of such a correlation, our scientific efforts aim at reinvigorating the debate on a relevant case, that should not remain unsolved or no longer investigated.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.