T he emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants with antibody-evading mutations raises concerns about variable levels of protection against infection after prior infection or vaccination (1). The Omicron variant is genetically divergent from previous variants, exacerbating these concerns (1). Reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 after previous infection has been demonstrated through a comparison of viral genomes collected from the same person (2). However, without genomic sequencing, reinfection can be difficult to distinguish from prolonged viral shedding. Available evidence suggests an interval of at least 90 days between positive tests is more likely to indicate reinfection than prolonged viral shedding (3).Public health authorities at the Southern Nevada Health District (SNHD) conducted surveillance of suspected reinfections in Clark County, Nevada, USA, to determine whether previously infected persons were protected against reinfection with new variants and to estimate the proportion of COVID-19 cases that occurred among persons with previous SARS-CoV-2 infections. SNHD also compared rates of suspected reinfection between demographic groups to characterize the groups most affected by suspected reinfection in Clark County and determine whether any groups were disproportionately affected. We report findings from surveillance of suspected reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 and rates of suspected reinfection among demographic groups in Clark County during March 2020-March 2022. MethodsHealth care providers, medical facilities, laboratories, and other out-of-state health departments report positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test results for residents of Clark County to SNHD. These results are collected in an electronic disease surveillance system. We calculated intervals between the specimen collection date from each person's initial positive PCR test and subsequent positive PCR tests. We considered a subsequent positive PCR test with specimen collection >90 days after specimen collection of the initial positive PCR test to be a suspected reinfection (3). Repeat positive PCR tests with specimen collection dates <90 days after the specimen collection of an initial positive PCR test were not considered suspected reinfections and were excluded from the analysis.We calculated the proportion of new cases per week that were suspected reinfections by dividing the number of suspected reinfections by all new PCR-identified Rapid Increase in Suspected SARS-CoV-2 Reinfections,

No abstract

SummaryIn this paper, we take a deep dive into writing a plugin to export power, energy, and other system environmental data from a Cray ® XC ™ system. With the release of the System Management Workstation 8.0 software, Cray has enabled customers to create site-specific plugins to export all of the data that can flow into the Cray Power Management Database into site-specific infrastructure. In this paper, we give practical information on what data are available using the plugin, and how to write, test, and deploy a plugin. We also share and explain example plugin code, detail design considerations when architecting a plugin, and look at some practical use cases supported by exporting telemetry data off a Cray ® XC ™ system. This paper is targeted at plugin developers, system administrators, data scientists, and site planners. The plugin feature was developed by Cray in response to discussions with and requirements from select members of the CUG XTreme SIG. This paper demonstrates lessons learned developing prototype plugins that export data off Cray ® XC ™ systems using Kafka, Redis Pub/Sub, and RabbitMQ. This plugin capability is in-use internally at Cray, used in production at NERSC, and is under consideration for deployment on systems at LANL and Sandia.

No abstract

No abstract