Researcher profile

Oliver Eales

Oliver Eales contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Incorporating vaccine effects into epidemiological models: common pitfalls and solutions

Incorporating vaccination into mathematical models appears deceptively simple: models integrate vaccine-derived protections, such as reduced susceptibility to infection, using parameters informed by empirical estimates of vaccine efficacy or effectiveness (VE). In practice, however, empirical VE estimates often do not correspond directly to the parameters of epidemiological models. Here, we extend previous work to demonstrate that in order to accurately parameterize a model, one must consider both a vaccine's mechanism of action and the statistic used to infer VE from empirical data. When a vaccine confers leaky protection -- that is, vaccination partially rather than completely reduces individual infection risk -- we show that common empirical VE estimation methods do not provide directly applicable values for model parameters. Naive (i.e. direct) incorporation of these VE estimates into models results in an underestimate of population-level vaccine impact. To make progress when these estimates are the only available sources for VE, we introduce a parameterization approach which more accurately aligns the modeled effect of vaccination with empirical estimates. Under this adjusted parameterization approach, models predict fewer total infections and lower herd immunity thresholds for leaky vaccines than would be predicted under current parameterization practices. Our parameterization guidelines and adjustment approach can be used to improve accuracy in models that are used in vaccine decision making and public health planning.

preprint2019arXiv

Do bulges stop stars forming?

In this paper, we use the Herschel Reference Survey to make a direct test of the hypothesis that the growth of a stellar bulge leads to a reduction in the star-formation efficiency of a galaxy (or conversely a growth in the gas-depletion timescale) as a result of the stabilisation of the gaseous disk by the gravitational field of the bulge. We find a strong correlation between star-formation efficiency and specific star-formation rate in galaxies without prominent bulges and in galaxies of the same morphological type, showing that there must be some other process besides the growth of a bulge that reduces the star-formation efficiency in galaxies. However, we also find that galaxies with more prominent bulges (Hubble types E to Sab) do have significantly lower star-formation efficiencies than galaxies with later morphological types, which is at least consistent with the hypothesis that the growth of a bulge leads to the reduction in the star-formation efficiency. The answer to the question in the title is therefore, yes and no: bulges may reduce the star-formation efficiency in galaxies but there must also be some other process at work. We also find that there is a significant but small difference in the star-formation efficiencies of galaxies with and without bars, in the sense that galaxies with bars have slightly higher star-formation efficiencies.