Paper detail

An epidemiological model with voluntary quarantine strategies governed by evolutionary game dynamics

During pandemic events, strategies such as social distancing can be fundamental to curb viral spreading. Such actions can reduce the number of simultaneous infections and mitigate the disease spreading, which is relevant to the risk of a healthcare system collapse. Although these strategies can be suggested, their actual implementation may depend on the population perception of the disease risk. The current COVID-19 crisis, for instance, is showing that some individuals are much more prone than others to remain isolated, avoiding unnecessary contacts. With this motivation, we propose an epidemiological SIR model that uses evolutionary game theory to take into account dynamic individual quarantine strategies, intending to combine in a single process social strategies, individual risk perception, and viral spreading. The disease spreads in a population whose agents can choose between self-isolation and a lifestyle careless of any epidemic risk. The strategy adoption is individual and depends on the perceived disease risk compared to the quarantine cost. The game payoff governs the strategy adoption, while the epidemic process governs the agent's health state. At the same time, the infection rate depends on the agent's strategy while the perceived disease risk depends on the fraction of infected agents. Results show recurrent infection waves, which were seen in previous epidemic scenarios with quarantine. Notably, the risk perception is found to be fundamental for controlling the magnitude of the infection peak, while the final infection size is mainly dictated by the infection rates. Low awareness leads to a single and strong infection peak, while a greater disease risk leads to shorter, although more frequent, peaks. The proposed model spontaneously captures relevant aspects of a pandemic event, highlighting the fundamental role of social strategies.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.