4.7 Article

A new comparative study on the general fractional model of COVID-19 with isolation and quarantine effects

期刊

ALEXANDRIA ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 61, 期 6, 页码 4779-4791

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.aej.2021.10.030

关键词

Fractional calculus; General fractional derivative; COVID-19 pandemic; Isolation and quarantine effects; Stability analysis; Modified predictor-corrector method

资金

  1. Xunta de Galicia [ED431C 2019/02]
  2. Instituto de Salud Carlos III [COV20/00617]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A generalized fractional model is introduced to study the COVID-19 pandemic, incorporating real clinical observations for parameter estimation and simulation. The model shows better fitting to real data and provides key parameters to assess societal health conditions.
A generalized version of fractional models is introduced for the COVID-19 pandemic, including the effects of isolation and quarantine. First, the general structure of fractional derivatives and integrals is discussed; then the generalized fractional model is defined from which the stability results are derived. Meanwhile, a set of real clinical observations from China is considered to determine the parameters and compute the basic reproduction number, i.e., R-0 approximate to 6.6361. Additionally, an efficient numerical technique is applied to simulate the new model and provide the associated numerical results. Based on these simulations, some figures and tables are presented, and the data of reported cases from China are compared with the numerical findings in both classical and fractional frameworks. Our comparative study indicates that a particular case of general fractional formula provides a better fit to the real data compared to the other classical and fractional models. There are also some other key parameters to be examined that show the health of society when they come to eliminate the disease. (C) 2021 THE AUTHORS. Published by Elsevier BV on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据