Significance This paper compares the probabilistic accuracy of short-term forecasts of reported deaths due to COVID-19 during the first year and a half of the pandemic in the United States. Results show high variation in accuracy between and within stand-alone models and more consistent accuracy from an ensemble model that combined forecasts from all eligible models. This demonstrates that an ensemble model provided a reliable and comparatively accurate means of forecasting deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic that exceeded the performance of all of the models that contributed to it. This work strengthens the evidence base for synthesizing multiple models to support public-health action.

Short-term probabilistic forecasts of the trajectory of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States have served as a visible and important communication channel between the scientific modeling community and both the general public and decision-makers. Forecasting models provide specific, quantitative, and evaluable predictions that inform short-term decisions such as healthcare staffing needs, school closures, and allocation of medical supplies. Starting in April 2020, the US COVID-19 Forecast Hub (https://covid19forecasthub.org/) collected, disseminated, and synthesized tens of millions of specific predictions from more than 90 different academic, industry, and independent research groups. A multi-model ensemble forecast that combined predictions from dozens of different research groups every week provided the most consistently accurate probabilistic forecasts of incident deaths due to COVID-19 at the state and national level from April 2020 through October 2021. The performance of 27 individual models that submitted complete forecasts of COVID-19 deaths consistently throughout this year showed high variability in forecast skill across time, geospatial units, and forecast horizons. Two-thirds of the models evaluated showed better accuracy than a naïve baseline model. Forecast accuracy degraded as models made predictions further into the future, with probabilistic error at a 20-week horizon 3-5 times larger than when predicting at a 1-week horizon. This project underscores the role that collaboration and active coordination between governmental public health agencies, academic modeling teams, and industry partners can play in developing modern modeling capabilities to support local, state, and federal response to outbreaks. Significance Statement This paper compares the probabilistic accuracy of short-term forecasts of reported deaths due to COVID-19 during the first year and a half of the pandemic in the US. Results show high variation in accuracy between and within stand-alone models, and more consistent accuracy from an ensemble model that combined forecasts from all eligible models. This demonstrates that an ensemble model provided a reliable and comparatively accurate means of forecasting deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic that exceeded the performance of all of the models that contributed to it. This work strengthens the evidence base for synthesizing multiple models to support public health action.

Academic researchers, government agencies, industry groups, and individuals have produced forecasts at an unprecedented scale during the COVID-19 pandemic. To leverage these forecasts, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) partnered with an academic research lab at the University of Massachusetts Amherst to create the US COVID-19 Forecast Hub. Launched in April 2020, the Forecast Hub is a dataset with point and probabilistic forecasts of incident cases, incident hospitalizations, incident deaths, and cumulative deaths due to COVID-19 at county, state, and national, levels in the United States. Included forecasts represent a variety of modeling approaches, data sources, and assumptions regarding the spread of COVID-19. The goal of this dataset is to establish a standardized and comparable set of short-term forecasts from modeling teams. These data can be used to develop ensemble models, communicate forecasts to the public, create visualizations, compare models, and inform policies regarding COVID-19 mitigation. These open-source data are available via download from GitHub, through an online API, and through R packages.

A stand-alone machine learned turbulence model is developed and applied for the solution of steady and unsteady boundary layer equations, and issues and constraints associated with the model are investigated. The results demonstrate that an accurately trained machine learned model can provide grid convergent, smooth solutions, work in extrapolation mode, and converge to a correct solution from ill-posed flow conditions. The accuracy of the machine learned response surface depends on the choice of flow variables, and training approach to minimize the overlap in the datasets. For the former, grouping flow variables into a problem relevant parameter for input features is desirable. For the latter, incorporation of physics-based constraints during training is helpful. Data clustering is also identified to be a useful tool as it avoids skewness of the model towards a dominant flow feature.

The SARS-CoV-2 virus is responsible for the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which continues to spread to populations throughout the continental United States. Most state and local governments have adopted some level of “social distancing” policy, but infections have continued to spread despite these efforts. Absent a vaccine, authorities have few other tools by which to mitigate further spread of the virus. This begs the question of how effective social policy really is at reducing new infections that, left alone, would likely overwhelm the existing hospitalization capacity of many states. We developed a mathematical model that captures correlations between state-level “social distancing” policies and infection kinetics for all U.S. states, and use it to illustrate the link between social policy decisions, disease dynamics, and an effective reproduction number that changes over time, for case studies of Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Washington states. In general, our findings indicate that the potential for second waves of infection, which result after reopening states without an increase to immunity, can be mitigated by a return of social distancing policies as soon as possible after the waves are detected.