大流行病控制--从控制论的角度看该做什么和不该做什么。

Latchezar Tomov, Dimitrina Miteva, Metodija Sekulovski, Hristiana Batselova, Tsvetelina Velikova
{"title":"大流行病控制--从控制论的角度看该做什么和不该做什么。","authors":"Latchezar Tomov, Dimitrina Miteva, Metodija Sekulovski, Hristiana Batselova, Tsvetelina Velikova","doi":"10.5662/wjm.v12.i5.392","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Managing a pandemic is a difficult task. Pandemics are part of the dynamics of nonlinear systems with multiple different interactive features that co-adapt to each other (such as humans, animals, and pathogens). The target of controlling such a nonlinear system is best achieved using the control system theory developed in engineering and applied in systems biology. But is this theory and its principles actually used in controlling the current coronavirus disease-19 pandemic? We review the evidence for applying principles in different aspects of pandemic control related to different goals such as disease eradication, disease containment, and short- or long-term economic loss minimization. Successful policies implement multiple measures in concordance with control theory to achieve a robust response. In contrast, unsuccessful policies have numerous failures in different measures or focus only on a single measure (only testing, vaccines, <i>etc.</i>). Successful approaches rely on predictions instead of reactions to compensate for the costs of time delay, on knowledge-based analysis instead of trial-and-error, to control complex nonlinear systems, and on risk assessment instead of waiting for more evidence. Iran is an example of the effects of delayed response due to waiting for evidence to arrive instead of a proper risk analytical approach. New Zealand, Australia, and China are examples of appropriate application of basic control theoretic principles and focusing on long-term adaptive strategies, updating measures with the evolution of the pandemic.</p>","PeriodicalId":23729,"journal":{"name":"World journal of methodology","volume":"12 5","pages":"392-401"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/8b/90/WJM-12-392.PMC9516542.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pandemic control - do's and don'ts from a control theory perspective.\",\"authors\":\"Latchezar Tomov, Dimitrina Miteva, Metodija Sekulovski, Hristiana Batselova, Tsvetelina Velikova\",\"doi\":\"10.5662/wjm.v12.i5.392\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Managing a pandemic is a difficult task. Pandemics are part of the dynamics of nonlinear systems with multiple different interactive features that co-adapt to each other (such as humans, animals, and pathogens). The target of controlling such a nonlinear system is best achieved using the control system theory developed in engineering and applied in systems biology. But is this theory and its principles actually used in controlling the current coronavirus disease-19 pandemic? We review the evidence for applying principles in different aspects of pandemic control related to different goals such as disease eradication, disease containment, and short- or long-term economic loss minimization. Successful policies implement multiple measures in concordance with control theory to achieve a robust response. In contrast, unsuccessful policies have numerous failures in different measures or focus only on a single measure (only testing, vaccines, <i>etc.</i>). Successful approaches rely on predictions instead of reactions to compensate for the costs of time delay, on knowledge-based analysis instead of trial-and-error, to control complex nonlinear systems, and on risk assessment instead of waiting for more evidence. Iran is an example of the effects of delayed response due to waiting for evidence to arrive instead of a proper risk analytical approach. New Zealand, Australia, and China are examples of appropriate application of basic control theoretic principles and focusing on long-term adaptive strategies, updating measures with the evolution of the pandemic.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23729,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World journal of methodology\",\"volume\":\"12 5\",\"pages\":\"392-401\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/8b/90/WJM-12-392.PMC9516542.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World journal of methodology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5662/wjm.v12.i5.392\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World journal of methodology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5662/wjm.v12.i5.392","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

管理大流行病是一项艰巨的任务。大流行是非线性系统动态的一部分,该系统具有多种不同的交互特征,可相互共同适应(如人类、动物和病原体)。控制这种非线性系统的目标最好是利用在工程学中发展起来并应用于系统生物学的控制系统理论来实现。但是,这一理论及其原理是否真正用于控制当前的冠状病毒疾病-19 大流行?我们回顾了在与不同目标(如根除疾病、遏制疾病以及短期或长期经济损失最小化)相关的大流行控制的不同方面应用这些原则的证据。成功的政策会根据控制理论采取多种措施,以实现强有力的应对。与此相反,不成功的政策在不同的措施上有许多失误,或者只关注单一措施(仅检测、疫苗等)。成功的方法依靠预测而不是反应来弥补时间延误的代价,依靠基于知识的分析而不是试错来控制复杂的非线性系统,依靠风险评估而不是等待更多证据。伊朗就是一个例子,说明了等待证据而不是采取适当的风险分析方法所造成的延迟反应的影响。新西兰、澳大利亚和中国则是适当应用基本控制理论原则,注重长期适应战略,根据疫情发展更新措施的例子。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pandemic control - do's and don'ts from a control theory perspective.

Managing a pandemic is a difficult task. Pandemics are part of the dynamics of nonlinear systems with multiple different interactive features that co-adapt to each other (such as humans, animals, and pathogens). The target of controlling such a nonlinear system is best achieved using the control system theory developed in engineering and applied in systems biology. But is this theory and its principles actually used in controlling the current coronavirus disease-19 pandemic? We review the evidence for applying principles in different aspects of pandemic control related to different goals such as disease eradication, disease containment, and short- or long-term economic loss minimization. Successful policies implement multiple measures in concordance with control theory to achieve a robust response. In contrast, unsuccessful policies have numerous failures in different measures or focus only on a single measure (only testing, vaccines, etc.). Successful approaches rely on predictions instead of reactions to compensate for the costs of time delay, on knowledge-based analysis instead of trial-and-error, to control complex nonlinear systems, and on risk assessment instead of waiting for more evidence. Iran is an example of the effects of delayed response due to waiting for evidence to arrive instead of a proper risk analytical approach. New Zealand, Australia, and China are examples of appropriate application of basic control theoretic principles and focusing on long-term adaptive strategies, updating measures with the evolution of the pandemic.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信