Hui Yang1, Tim Rogers2, Thilo Gross3. 1. Web Sciences Center, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 610054, China. 2. Centre for Networks and Collective Behaviour, Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Bath, Claverton Down, BA2 7AY Bath, United Kingdom. 3. Department of Engineering Mathematics, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1UB, United Kingdom.
Abstract
In epidemiological modelling, dynamics on networks, and, in particular, adaptive and heterogeneous networks have recently received much interest. Here, we present a detailed analysis of a previously proposed model that combines heterogeneity in the individuals with adaptive rewiring of the network structure in response to a disease. We show that in this model, qualitative changes in the dynamics occur in two phase transitions. In a macroscopic description, one of these corresponds to a local bifurcation, whereas the other one corresponds to a non-local heteroclinic bifurcation. This model thus provides a rare example of a system where a phase transition is caused by a non-local bifurcation, while both micro- and macro-level dynamics are accessible to mathematical analysis. The bifurcation points mark the onset of a behaviour that we call network inoculation. In the respective parameter region, exposure of the system to a pathogen will lead to an outbreak that collapses but leaves the network in a configuration where the disease cannot reinvade, despite every agent returning to the susceptible class. We argue that this behaviour and the associated phase transitions can be expected to occur in a wide class of models of sufficient complexity.
In epidemiological modelling, dynamics on networks, and, in particular, adaptive and heterogeneous networks have recently received much interest. Here, we present a detailed analysis of a previously proposed model that combines heterogeneity in the individuals with adaptive rewiring of the network structure in response to a disease. We show that in this model, qualitative changes in the dynamics occur in two phase transitions. In a macroscopic description, one of these corresponds to a local bifurcation, whereas the other one corresponds to a non-local heteroclinic bifurcation. This model thus provides a rare example of a system where a phase transition is caused by a non-local bifurcation, while both micro- and macro-level dynamics are accessible to mathematical analysis. The bifurcation points mark the onset of a behaviour that we call network inoculation. In the respective parameter region, exposure of the system to a pathogen will lead to an outbreak that collapses but leaves the network in a configuration where the disease cannot reinvade, despite every agent returning to the susceptible class. We argue that this behaviour and the associated phase transitions can be expected to occur in a wide class of models of sufficient complexity.
Throughout history, epidemic diseases have been a major cause
of death in the human population. After a brief respite during the mid twentieth century,
incidences of epidemics are now on the rise again, due to the emergence of new diseases such
as Aids and Ebola, and the return of old killers, such as Tuberculosis and Influenza.
Consequently, the study of epidemiology has received much recent attention from the
mathematics and physics communities. In particular, network models provide a new theoretical
tool by which the spreading of epidemic diseases can be understood and lessons for the real
world can be learned. The present direction of this field is to push network models to greater
realism by incorporating more and more aspects of real world epidemics, while maintaining
mathematical and/or numerical tractability of the models. In this paper, we study the combined
effect of two properties of real world contact networks across which real epidemics spread:
adaptivity and heterogeneity. The network is adaptive in the sense that individuals in the
network can respond to the presence of the disease, and it is heterogeneous in the sense that
the individuals represented by network nodes have different properties, making them more or
less susceptible to the disease. We show that combining these features leads to a phenomenon
that we call network inoculation. Exposure of a given initial network to a
pathogen can lead to an outbreak that collapses and leaves the network resistant to future
outbreaks. This resistance is acquired solely through the rewiring of the network structure,
without any nodes becoming physically immune to the disease. We use a variety of tools,
including agent-based simulation, moment expansions, percolation methods, and numerical
continuation, to reveal the heteroclinic mechanism that leads to this inoculation
phenomenon.
INTRODUCTION
A central goal in complex systems research is to understand how macroscopic transitions
arise from the microscopic interactions within a system. In this context, an important role is played by coarse-grained
models, describing the system in terms of a set of ordinary differential equations
(ODEs). By capturing the dynamics
of the system in terms of a suitable set of variables, it is sometimes possible to construct
a faithful model of a given transition that is easy enough to be tractable by the tools of
nonlinear dynamics. In the analysis, the transition then appears as a bifurcation, whose
study reveals deep insights into the nature and behaviour of the underlying microscopic
system.A paradigmatic example is the epidemiological susceptible-infected-susceptible (SIS)
model. In its simplest incarnation, this
model describes the propagation of an infectious disease in a group of randomly interacting
agents. Each agent is either infected with the disease (state I) or susceptible to the
disease (state S). In time, the state of agents changes due to transmission of the disease
and recovery of infected agents. The dynamics of this system can be understood by writing a
single differential equation that captures the proportion of agents [I]
that are infected. Depending on the details of interactions, the system either approaches a
state where the disease is extinct or a state where it persists at a constant level. In the
ODE-based model, the transition between the two qualitatively different types of behaviours
occurs at a threshold parameter value that is a bifurcation point.In the SIS model, and many other models besides, the important bifurcation is local, i.e.,
it is a bifurcation that can be characterised by changes in the phase portrait in the
proximity of a single steady state or other invariant set. For instance, in the epidemic example, this bifurcation is a
transcritical bifurcation in which a steady state with non-zero density of infected agents
intersects the state where the disease is extinct, and the two exchange their stability.
Thus, the relevant changes in the phase portrait occur in the vicinity of the extinct steady
state.The transcritical bifurcation and its close relatives, the fold and pitchfork bifurcations,
have been linked to phase transitions in a wide variety of systems including epidemics, collective motion of animals, human opinion formation, neuronal dynamics, and others. In a smaller number of models, the
underlying bifurcation is a Hopf bifurcation, which marks the onset of, at least transient,
oscillations. However, even
the Hopf bifurcation is a local bifurcation. By comparison, models in which a
phase-transition corresponds to a non-local bifurcation in a macroscopic model are rare.In nonlinear dynamics, several non-local bifurcations have been described. An example of
particular interest for the present paper is the heteroclinic bifurcation. In this bifurcation, a
transition in the macroscopic dynamics of a system occurs, due to the appearance of a
trajectory connecting different invariant sets (see Fig. 1). Such bifurcations already occur robustly in relatively low-dimensional
dynamical systems. The closely related
homoclinic bifurcation often marks the point where a limit cycle is destroyed and thus
causes a discontinuous phase transitions in many systems. One of these is the adaptive SIS
model: an SIS system, where additionally the susceptible nodes try to avoid infection by
rewiring their links away from infected nodes. In the adaptive SIS model, the importance of these homoclinic
bifurcations is very minor but can play the role of an epidemic threshold in a small
parameter space. Homoclinic bifurcations have also been observed in other network models,
where information is exchanged globally between nodes, e.g., Ref. 18.
FIG. 1.
Sketch of the phase portrait before, during, and after a heteroclinic bifurcation. In
the system, two attractors (black dots) coexist with two saddles (white and grey dots).
The flow field is indicated by thin blue arrows. Before the bifurcation, a small
perturbation launches the system on a trajectory leading to the left attractor (a). As
parameters are changed, a heteroclinic connection between the saddles is formed, shown
by the red strong arrow in (b). After the bifurcation, fluctuations on the white saddle
can now lead to a final state at the right attractor (c), while the left attractor has
become unreachable from the white saddle.
Sketch of the phase portrait before, during, and after a heteroclinic bifurcation. In
the system, two attractors (black dots) coexist with two saddles (white and grey dots).
The flow field is indicated by thin blue arrows. Before the bifurcation, a small
perturbation launches the system on a trajectory leading to the left attractor (a). As
parameters are changed, a heteroclinic connection between the saddles is formed, shown
by the red strong arrow in (b). After the bifurcation, fluctuations on the white saddle
can now lead to a final state at the right attractor (c), while the left attractor has
become unreachable from the white saddle.Homoclinics, heteroclinics, and other non-local bifurcations are also known to play a major
role in fluid dynamics and climate system modelling. Perhaps, the best known example is the Lorenz model. Furthermore, heteroclinic orbits feature
prominently in the analysis of switching in stochastic dynamics systems, where they describe
optimal paths connecting regular saddles. However, these models are directly formulated on the
macroscopic level, such that no direct connection to the phase transition in the underlying
microscopic dynamics can be made. Evidence for such bifurcation was also seen in macro-level
models of population dynamics.
However, apart from a notable exception,
models that resolve the detailed dynamics are often too complex to reveal a detailed picture
of heteroclinics in the dynamics by use of bifurcation theory.In a recent paper, we investigated the dynamics of a heterogeneous adaptive SIS model,
which combined SIS dynamics and disease avoidance behaviour with heterogeneity in the
susceptibility of the population. Both heterogeneity and adaptivity are known to impact the
dynamics of diseases of humans and are
therefore presently high on the agenda in network epidemiology. For instance, adaptivity was
shown to significantly increase the epidemic threshold and lead to a first-order transition
at the onset of the disease and can induce robust oscillations. Moreover, studies showed that adaptive disease avoidance behaviour
can effectively enhance the impact of disease control efforts. The heterogeneity between individuals was
shown to lower the epidemic threshold in some networks but can also reduce the size and risk of
outbreaks.In Ref. 45, we found that a plausible disease
avoidance mechanism can lead to states where the network has a heterogeneous topology but is
more resilient to the invasion of diseases than it would be possible in less heterogeneous
topologies. These findings are thus contrary to the intuition gained from landmark results
for simpler models, which seem to
suggest that heterogeneous topologies would always aid the transmission of the disease.While our previous publication pointed
to a mechanism that leads to the emergence of extraordinarily stable heterogeneous
topologies, the actual transition at which this mechanisms sets in was too complicated to
analyze within the scope of that paper. Here, we investigate this transition first in the
previously proposed model and then in a highly stylized model that enables a deeper
understanding of the phenomenon.We find that the threshold for the onset of an endemic infection does not correspond to a
loss of stability of the disease-free state. Instead, there is a large parameter range in
which initial disease-free networks are unstable and thus permit disease invasion, but
outbreaks do not lead to an endemic state but collapse back to another disease-free state,
with different network topologies. The outbreak-and-collapse dynamics of the system in this
region is thus reminiscent of an susceptible-infected-recovered (SIR) model. However, there
is no recovered (R) agent state in the model that confers immunity. Instead, an initial
outbreak leads to the formation of more resilient network topologies and thus “inoculates”
the network against future disease invasion.Network inoculation is characterized by the presence of heteroclinic orbits that connect
different disease free states. Because of the basic physics of the system, the disease-free
states form a manifold. As the infectivity of the disease is changed, the orbit starting
from a given initial steady state connects to a (unique) saddle point. When this happens, a
saddle-heteroclinic bifurcation occurs, which ends the inoculation-type dynamics from the
respective initial network. For all higher values of infectivity, the heteroclinic
trajectory from that initial state leads to an endemic state where the disease can persist
in the system indefinitely. Thus, the onset of endemic disease dynamics is marked by a phase
transition caused by a heteroclinic bifurcation in the underlying dynamics.This paper is organized as follows: We start by reviewing the previously proposed model
(Sec. II). In agent-based simulations, we observe that
the outcomes of simulation runs can be classified into 3 different types (Sec. III). We then explore the phase boundaries between the
three different types of outcomes. Using percolation theory, we analytically compute the
threshold where outbreaks start to occur (Sec. IV).
Thereafter, using moment expansions, we formulate a macroscopic model of the dynamics in
terms of ordinary differential equations (Sec. V), and
this model allows us to study the dynamics by tools of dynamical systems theory. Combining
results from all of the tools established up to this point, we show that the transition from
outbreaks to endemic behavior occurs due to a heteroclinic bifurcation (Sec. VI). To understand this transition in greater detail, we
finish by formulating and analyzing a simpler solvable model for the network inoculation
phenomenon (Sec. VII).
HETEROGENEOUS ADAPTIVE SIS MODEL
We consider a population of N agents, which can be either infected (state
I) or susceptible to the disease (state S). The agents are connected by a total of
K bidirectional social contacts. Thus, the system can be described as a
network in which the agents are the network nodes and the social contacts are the links. In
time, the system evolves (a) because of the epidemic dynamics and (b) due to a behavioural
response of the agents to the disease, which leads to the rewiring of links.In the epidemic dynamics (a) for every link connecting a susceptible and an infected agent,
there is a chance that the susceptible agent becomes infected, amounting to an infection
rate of (per link), where
β is a parameter that controls the overall infectivity of the disease and
ψ is a parameter that describes the susceptibility of the susceptible
agent. In particular, we consider the case where two types of agents exist: highly
susceptible agents (type A) and less susceptible agents (type B). These types are intrinsic
properties of the agents, i.e., unlike the epidemic states the type of an agent never
changes. Furthermore, all infected agents recover at a fixed rate μ, which
is identical for all agents. Upon recovery, agents immediately become susceptible again.We denote the proportion of agents of type A in the population by and their
susceptibility by . The remaining
portion of agents is of type B
and has susceptibility . In the
following, we chose these parameters such that . We thus control the
heterogeneity of susceptibility in the population by changing and simultaneously
such that the mean susceptibility remains fixed. Hence, the
intra-individual heterogeneity is indicated by one of the parameters, say, , whereas the
overall spreading rate is controlled by the epidemic parameter β.In the social dynamics (b), the agents react to the presence of the disease by rewiring
their social connections. In each small time interval of length dt, a
susceptible agent who is linked to an infected agent breaks that link with probability
ωdt. For every link a susceptible agent breaks, the agent establishes a
new link to a randomly chosen susceptible agent, such that the total number of links is
conserved.In the following, we use the parameters , and unless noted otherwise.
Hence, the mean degree of the network is . This is a typical
parameter set where the model shows its generic behaviour. In our experience, the results
obtained are very similar for other parameter sets unless extreme values are chosen.
CLASSIFICATION OF OUTCOMES
We start the analysis by numerically exploring the possible outcomes in agent-based
simulations. We initialize the system as an Erdős-Rényi random graph, where the number of
agents N and links K is fixed and mean degree is then
given by . Each agent (regardless of
type) is initially infected with probability and susceptible
otherwise. We then simulate the time evolution of the system of agents using a Gillespie
algorithm.Three typical outcomes are shown in Fig. 2. Depending
on the parameter values, we observe either a rapid collapse to a disease-free state, before
a significant proportion of the agents have been infected (type I), an initial epidemic
outbreak, in which a large proportion of agents are infected (type II), or an outbreak
leading to an endemic state where the disease persists indefinitely (type III).
FIG. 2.
Three simulation results from agent-based simulations. Top row: If the infectivity is
low (left, ), then the epidemic
dies out quickly and the system freezes in the disease-free state (note the different
axis scalings on this plot). For intermediate infectivity (center, ), there is an initial
outbreak, which infects a large proportion of the agents. However, subsequently this
outbreak collapses and the system once again approaches the disease free state. If
infectivity is high (right, ), then the system
approaches an endemic state where the diseases remain in the system in the long term.
Bottom row: Degree distributions in the final state (symbols) in comparison to the
initial degree distribution (line). If the infectivity is low (left, ), the disease has
only a very minor impact on the degree distribution due to its quick collapse. For
intermediate infectivity (center, ), the rewiring leads
to a bimodal distribution where many links are concentrated on the nodes of the less
susceptible type, which prevents further outbreaks. If infectivity is high (right, ), ongoing rewiring
leads to a broad continuous distribution, but this is no longer sufficient to lead to a
collapse of the epidemic. Parameters: .
Three simulation results from agent-based simulations. Top row: If the infectivity is
low (left, ), then the epidemic
dies out quickly and the system freezes in the disease-free state (note the different
axis scalings on this plot). For intermediate infectivity (center, ), there is an initial
outbreak, which infects a large proportion of the agents. However, subsequently this
outbreak collapses and the system once again approaches the disease free state. If
infectivity is high (right, ), then the system
approaches an endemic state where the diseases remain in the system in the long term.
Bottom row: Degree distributions in the final state (symbols) in comparison to the
initial degree distribution (line). If the infectivity is low (left, ), the disease has
only a very minor impact on the degree distribution due to its quick collapse. For
intermediate infectivity (center, ), the rewiring leads
to a bimodal distribution where many links are concentrated on the nodes of the less
susceptible type, which prevents further outbreaks. If infectivity is high (right, ), ongoing rewiring
leads to a broad continuous distribution, but this is no longer sufficient to lead to a
collapse of the epidemic. Parameters: .Let us try to extrapolate from the finite-size simulation to arbitrarily large systems. The
results of this analysis should hold in large finite systems encountered in the real world
or studied in large agent-based simulations, where finite size effects are mostly
irrelevant, due to the size of the system considered. Moreover, referring to an infinitely
large system is attractive because it allows us to avoid problems in the classification of
behaviours that exist in the finite system. Consider that in the finite case the difference
between type-I (recovery to the disease-free state) behaviour and type-II (outbreak,
collapse) behaviour is not rigorously defined, i.e., the transition is gradual as the number
of infected at maximum increases. Furthermore, even the difference between type-II and
type-III (persistent) behaviour becomes fuzzy: The finite size agent-based simulation has a
finite probability to spontaneously collapse to the absorbing disease-free state. Thus,
persistent dynamics cannot be a true long-term behaviour, although we never observed such a
collapse of apparently persistent epidemics in all but the smallest simulation runs (e.g.,
N < 100) or when the system is just at the epidemic threshold.By contrast, the different types of behaviours can be cleanly defined in the infinite
system. We say, that the behavior of the system is of type I, if the epidemic never grows to
a point where a finite proportion of the agents is infected. This makes type-I behavior
qualitatively different from type II and type III, where at some point a finite proportion
of the agents is infected. We further distinguish type-II and type-III behaviours by their
long-term behavior: We can say, that a system shows type-III behavior if in the infinite
size limit, a finite proportion of the agents are infected after arbitrarily long time.Now returning to finite systems, the considerations above enable us to classify the
dynamics using scaling relationships. However, in practice, this is not necessary as the
differences in sufficiently large simulations are clear cut. Results from simulations with nodes in Fig.
3 show that the three types of outcomes can be
clearly distinguished. We note that none of the simulation runs has or . Thus,
choosing thresholds anywhere in these ranges will lead to the same classification of
outcomes.
FIG. 3.
Classification of outcomes from agent-based simulations. Shown are the maximal
proportion of infected agents encountered in a simulation run,
(top left) and the proportion of infected after long time t, (, bottom
left). The symbols represent observed outcomes for each of 100 simulation runs for each
value of infectivity β, many of which are so similar that they are
indistinguishable. It is apparent that three qualitatively different outcomes are
observed: (type I), (type II), and (type III). While two
different outcomes are possible for some values of β, they can be
clearly distinguished in this case, see Histograms in the panels on the right, with
values of β corresponding to the thin lines shown in the left plots.
Parameters: , .
Classification of outcomes from agent-based simulations. Shown are the maximal
proportion of infected agents encountered in a simulation run,
(top left) and the proportion of infected after long time t, (, bottom
left). The symbols represent observed outcomes for each of 100 simulation runs for each
value of infectivity β, many of which are so similar that they are
indistinguishable. It is apparent that three qualitatively different outcomes are
observed: (type I), (type II), and (type III). While two
different outcomes are possible for some values of β, they can be
clearly distinguished in this case, see Histograms in the panels on the right, with
values of β corresponding to the thin lines shown in the left plots.
Parameters: , .We observe that in some ranges of infectivity, different types of outcomes are possible.
The regions in which different outcomes are possible seem to overlap, and around there is heterogeneity in
the prevalence of the endemic state. The latter is a numerical effect which appears due to
intrinsic stochasticity of the agent based simulation, which leads to different amounts of
rewiring during the approach to the endemic state. The mechanism that causes these
differences between trajectories will become apparent in Sec. VI. To explore the former effect in more detail, we use the proposed
classification to plot the propensity of outcomes in Fig. 4. For low values of heterogeneity between nodes , we find that for systems
there are only two possible outcomes, namely, type-I (recovery) and type-III (endemic)
behavior. However, if the susceptibility of agents is very heterogeneous, then also type-II
(outbreak, collapse) behavior is observed.
FIG. 4.
Propensity of outcomes depending on infectivity (β) and heterogeneity (). Shown is
the probability that a given type of behavior is observed when simulating a random
initial network with the respective parameter values (see text). These probabilities
were estimated by classifying the outcomes of 100 simulation runs for each parameter
combination. For low values of heterogeneity (top, ), we observe type-I
(recovery) behavior if infectivity is low and type-III (endemic) behavior if infectivity
is high. At intermediate values, there is a transition region where both outcomes are
possible. For systems with strong heterogeneity (bottom, ), additionally
type-II (outbreak, collapse) behavior is observed at intermediate values of infectivity,
which is separated from type-I and type-III behavior by two transition regions.
Parameters: .
Propensity of outcomes depending on infectivity (β) and heterogeneity (). Shown is
the probability that a given type of behavior is observed when simulating a random
initial network with the respective parameter values (see text). These probabilities
were estimated by classifying the outcomes of 100 simulation runs for each parameter
combination. For low values of heterogeneity (top, ), we observe type-I
(recovery) behavior if infectivity is low and type-III (endemic) behavior if infectivity
is high. At intermediate values, there is a transition region where both outcomes are
possible. For systems with strong heterogeneity (bottom, ), additionally
type-II (outbreak, collapse) behavior is observed at intermediate values of infectivity,
which is separated from type-I and type-III behavior by two transition regions.
Parameters: .In Fig. 4, we see that regions of different types of
outcomes are separated by transition regions where 2 outcomes are possible. To prepare for
the more detailed exploration below, let us now construct a 2-parameter phase diagram of the
system (Fig. 5). In this diagram, we draw the phase
boundaries at the points where different types of outcomes occur in simulation, e.g., the
phase boundary between outcomes of type I and type II β is set
of points where the type-II outcome starts to show up and the same to the phase boundary
between type II and type III β.
FIG. 5.
Phase boundaries between different types of outcomes: β
refers to the I/II boundary and β to the II/III boundary.
Shown are results from the classification of simulation runs (symbols) and an estimate
using percolation theory from Eq. (5)
(dashed line). Parameters: .
Phase boundaries between different types of outcomes: β
refers to the I/II boundary and β to the II/III boundary.
Shown are results from the classification of simulation runs (symbols) and an estimate
using percolation theory from Eq. (5)
(dashed line). Parameters: .
ONSET OF OUTBREAKS
Let us now try to understand the phase diagram analytically. We start by considering the
onset of outbreaks, i.e., the boundary of type-I behaviour. The ability of a disease to
spread in a population can be quantified in terms of the basic reproductive number
R0, which denotes the number of secondary infections, caused
by one infected, in the limit of low disease prevalence. If , the disease can percolate
through the network and thus outbreaks become possible.We can compute R0 by considering a typical newly infected agent
and computing the number of neighbours this agent will infect before recovering. Following
Ref. 13, we take into account that the number of
links of the focal agent decreases in time as neighbouring agents rewire away. The loss rate
of links is equal to the rewiring rate ω. Thus, the remaining degree after
time t is where k0 is the initial
number of neighbours. Since we are interested in the limit of low prevalence, all neighbours
can be assumed to be susceptible and we can find the number of secondary infections by
multiplying the probability of transmission, which we call p for the
moment, and then integrating over the typical time to recovery . This yields For the heterogeneous network, we can express the
probability of transmission p as where x is the probability
that a randomly chosen neighbour is of type A and x is the
probability that a randomly chosen neighbour is of type B. As the initial network is an
Erdős-Rényi random graph, x = p,
x = p, and . Substituting into Eq. (2) and setting yields and hence the threshold with .
Expectedly, this equation is very closely related to the epidemic threshold in the
homogeneous system. The two values of ψ are effectively averaged and only
the numerical mean appears.A comparison of the outbreak threshold identified based on percolation arguments and the
numerical results show good qualitative agreement (Fig. 5). In the simulations, we observe the outbreak only at slightly higher levels of
infectivity, which is most likely a finite size effect. Closely above to the theoretical
threshold for the infinite size system, the finite size simulation can still collapse to the
absorbing disease free state due to stochastic extinction.The results obtained above were based on the assumption that agents of type A and type B
are well mixed. While this assumption is true in the initial state, very different outbreak
thresholds can be found if the assumption is violated, for instance, if rewiring in response
to an earlier outbreak led to a non-random mixing in the population. We explore this
particular scenario in detail in Section V.To gain a general understanding of the effects of assortativity in the disease free state,
let us now consider a disease free state with given number of a–a and b–b links. We denote
the density of these links in the population by and ,
respectively. The numerical values of both of these quantities are understood to be
normalized with respect to the total number of nodes N. In this notation,
the density of a–b links can then be
computed from the conservation law Given and , we can
therefore write the number of nodes of types i that are infected by a given
node of type j as These values form the entries in a 2 × 2 next-generation
matrix. The disease can spread if the leading eigenvalue of this matrix is larger than one.
By pulling the repeated factor out of the matrix, we get the condition where λ is the leading eigenvalue of
This provides a condition that can be solved for, say,
the critical number of a–a links at which
outbreaks start. While easy to compute, this condition is quite lengthy and is hence omitted
here. The result is shown in Fig. 6.
FIG. 6.
Impact of the network structure in the initial state. Shown is the stability threshold
found by percolation methods, Eq. (8)
(dashed line), in comparison to local asymptotic stability of the disease-free state
computed based on the eigenvalues of the Jacobian matrix of the moment equations (Sec.
V). The figure shows the regions of stable
disease free (type I, light grey), outbreak and collapse (type II, medium grey), and
endemic (type III, dark grey) behavior, where we used numerical integration of the
moment equations to distinguish between types II and III. In the remainder of the figure
(white), no networks exist as the sum of a–a links and b–b links would be greater than
the total number of links in the system. The figure shows that the agreement between the
threshold for the onset of outbreaks computed by the two different approximations is
almost perfect. Parameters: , , and .
Impact of the network structure in the initial state. Shown is the stability threshold
found by percolation methods, Eq. (8)
(dashed line), in comparison to local asymptotic stability of the disease-free state
computed based on the eigenvalues of the Jacobian matrix of the moment equations (Sec.
V). The figure shows the regions of stable
disease free (type I, light grey), outbreak and collapse (type II, medium grey), and
endemic (type III, dark grey) behavior, where we used numerical integration of the
moment equations to distinguish between types II and III. In the remainder of the figure
(white), no networks exist as the sum of a–a links and b–b links would be greater than
the total number of links in the system. The figure shows that the agreement between the
threshold for the onset of outbreaks computed by the two different approximations is
almost perfect. Parameters: , , and .The computation shows that for a given value of infectivity, an outbreak can occur if the
density of a–a links is sufficiently high. This is intuitively reasonable as a disease close
to the threshold will mainly spread in the highly susceptible (type A) population.
MOMENT EXPANSIONS
Percolation approaches, such as the ones above, are powerful tools for exploring the onset
of the epidemic. However, these approaches cannot reveal insights into the dynamics that
occur after the onset. We therefore have to switch to a different modelling approach. Here,
we use network moment expansions. Following the procedure in Refs. 13 and 45, we write a system of
differential equations that capture the dynamics of the abundances of different types of
links and node states. We use symbols of the form and with and to, respectively, denote the
proportion of agents and per capita density of links between agents of a given type. For
instance, is the
proportion of agents that are infected and of type A, and is density
of links between susceptible agents of type A and infected agents of type B. All of these
variables are normalized with respect to the total number of nodes N. Given
the number of infected nodes of a given type, we can thus find the number of susceptible
nodes by using the conservation law .The time evolution of the proportion of nodes that are infected and of types A and B can
be, respectively, written asFor the link densities, using a pair-approximation leads to equations of the form
where the terms on the right-hand-side describe the
impact of the different processes on the motif considered, in this
example. For instance, the first term corresponds to the creation of – links due to
recovery of the infected node in – links. In
total, the nodes recover
at the rate . Every such
recovery event creates an expected number of – links that is
identical to the average number of – links anchored
on an node, which is . In
summary, the change in the density of – links due to
recovery of nodes is , which
explains the first term in Eq. (12). In
addition to the equation shown above, there are 8 other differential equations capturing the
density of other types of links. For conciseness, these equations are shown in the Appendix.In contrast to the percolation approach and agent-based simulations, the moment expansion
allows us to investigate the dynamics directly on an emergent level. In the context of the
moment equations, the different types of long-term behaviours now appear as attractors of a
dynamical system. We analyze this system by numerical continuation of solution branches in
AUTO. Results from this analysis are
shown in Fig. 7.
FIG. 7.
Bifurcation diagram of the moment equations. Shown is the stationary disease prevalence
I as a function of infectivity β for two values of
heterogeneity, (black) and (red/gray). Numerical
continuation reveals both stable (solid) and unstable (dashed branches). Stability
changes due to a transcritical (TC) and saddle-node bifurcations (SN). Between these two
bifurcations, a hysteresis loop is formed that is typical for adaptive SIS models.
Parameters: .
Bifurcation diagram of the moment equations. Shown is the stationary disease prevalence
I as a function of infectivity β for two values of
heterogeneity, (black) and (red/gray). Numerical
continuation reveals both stable (solid) and unstable (dashed branches). Stability
changes due to a transcritical (TC) and saddle-node bifurcations (SN). Between these two
bifurcations, a hysteresis loop is formed that is typical for adaptive SIS models.
Parameters: .At sufficiently high infection rate, there is a stable steady state where the disease
persists with high prevalence. When we gradually lower the infection rate, this steady state
becomes unstable due to a saddle-node bifurcation, or by undergoing a Hopf bifurcation
quickly followed by saddle-node bifurcation, depending on parameters. The limit cycle formed
in the Hopf bifurcation only exists in a very small parameter range before it is destroyed
in further bifurcations.The situation is more complex for the disease free states. While the branches of steady
states where the disease is present have well-defined values in all of the dynamical
variables, the disease free states form a manifold. All states in which the density of
infected nodes is zero are necessarily stationary. However, this still permits networks with
different values of the variables and .Above we already explored the stability of the manifold of disease-free steady states using
the microscopic branching process approach. We can now replicate these results using the
macroscopic moment expansion approach. For this purpose, we compute the Jacobian matrix of
the moment equations on the manifold of the disease-free steady states. These states are
then stable if the leading eigenvalue of the Jacobian has a negative real part. A comparison
of the threshold that is thus obtained with the previous results (see Fig. 6) shows that the two approaches are in almost perfect
agreement. We have furthermore verified by direct simulation of the agent-based model that
introduction of the disease does not cause outbreaks in networks where the disease-free
state is predicted to be stable.
TRANSITION TO THE ENDEMIC STATE
Let us now turn our attention to the transition between type-II and type-III behavior. In
Secs. IV and V, we
have investigated the local bifurcations of the initial state and endemic states. The
results show that in sufficiently heterogeneous systems, the local bifurcations of these
states do not coincide with the phase transition to endemic behavior: This
initial state is unstable and the endemic state is stable before the onset of type-III
behavior. This is possible because the initial state is not in the basin of attraction of
the endemic state. Starting from the initial state, the system undergoes a single outbreak
before it falls back to a different disease-free state (with a different distribution of
links between node types) which is then stable against further outbreaks.The transition between type-II (single outbreak) and type-III (endemic state) behavior is
represented by a transition of the initial disease-free saddle from one basin of attraction
to another. For a given parameter set, we can visualize three different basins of attraction
(Fig. 6). We note that type-II (outbreak-collapse)
behavior occurs when the density of a–a links is high, whereas endemic behavior is observed
for intermediate density of a–a links. While the a–a link density has to exceed a threshold
value to allow outbreaks, the outbreak eventually collapses if a second threshold is
exceeded.We note that outbreak (type II) dynamics always land the network in a final state that is
characterized by a lower connectivity of the highly susceptible type A nodes, in which
disease propagation is suppressed. We verified this observation both in the moment equations
and by agent-based simulation. Hence,
one can say, that the outbreak inoculates the network against subsequent outbreaks of the
same disease.In the transition from type-II to type-III behaviour, the saddle point that is the initial
state leaves the basin of attraction of the stable disease-free state and enters the basin
of attraction of the endemic state (Fig. 8). For such a
transition of a saddle from one basin to another, a heteroclinic bifurcation is a likely
candidate. Moreover, as the parameter is tuned closer to the transition point, the
trajectories start to approach the saddle point that is formed in the fold bifurcation of
the endemic state (see Fig. 7). In Fig. 8, one can see one of the trajectories turning sharply in
as it passes close to the saddle. This shows the transition between type-II and type-III
behaviour, which provides further evidence that the transition is caused by a
saddle-heteroclinic bifurcation. In this bifurcation, the stable manifold from the saddle
hits the initial state, such that a heteroclinic connection between saddles is formed. This
connection also marks a basin boundary, such that in the bifurcation the initial state
passes from one basin of attraction to the other.
FIG. 8.
Trajectories from agent-based simulation. Shown are 15 trajectories starting from the
same initial state at different values of infectivity β. At low
infectivity, the trajectories remain in the vicinity of the initial state (inset). At
higher infectivity, there is an initial outbreak leading to high values of prevalence
I before collapsing back to a disease free state, where the ratio
between the degree of type B and type A nodes is now much higher than in the initial
network. At even higher values of infectivity, endemic behavior is observed as the
system approaches a stable state with high prevalence. The transition to endemic
behaviour occurs when trajectories encounter a point where the dynamics is almost
stationary, which points to a heteroclinic bifurcation. Parameters: , .
Trajectories from agent-based simulation. Shown are 15 trajectories starting from the
same initial state at different values of infectivity β. At low
infectivity, the trajectories remain in the vicinity of the initial state (inset). At
higher infectivity, there is an initial outbreak leading to high values of prevalence
I before collapsing back to a disease free state, where the ratio
between the degree of type B and type A nodes is now much higher than in the initial
network. At even higher values of infectivity, endemic behavior is observed as the
system approaches a stable state with high prevalence. The transition to endemic
behaviour occurs when trajectories encounter a point where the dynamics is almost
stationary, which points to a heteroclinic bifurcation. Parameters: , .We can illustrate the situation with a simplified sketch of the phase portrait (Fig. 9). The figure shows how two thresholds divide the manifold
of disease-free steady states into different sections in which perturbations lead to three
different types of outcomes observed. If other parameters of the system change, then these
two thresholds move such that for a given initial condition, the transitions appear as
transcritical and heteroclinic bifurcations, respectively.
FIG. 9.
Simplified sketch of the phase portrait in the epidemic model. Shown is a flow field
(thin blue arrows), the attracting endemic state (black circle), a saddle point (grey
circle) and a manifold of disease-free steady states (strong grey/black line), which can
be stable (black) or unstable (grey). Depending on the initial value of the x-axis, we
can distinguish between stable disease-free (type-I), outbreak and collapse (type-II),
and endemic (type-III) behavior, indicated by labels on the axis. The behaviour changes
at two threshold values (T1, T2)
which are marked by a local change in the stability of the manifold and the heteroclinic
connection. We note that this sketch has been simplified from the situation in the
epidemic model. If the x-axis was the a–a link density , the
type-II behavior would occur for intermediate values, whereas the type-III behavior
would occur at high values, which is harder to visualize in a 2d-plot, but qualitatively
similar.
Simplified sketch of the phase portrait in the epidemic model. Shown is a flow field
(thin blue arrows), the attracting endemic state (black circle), a saddle point (grey
circle) and a manifold of disease-free steady states (strong grey/black line), which can
be stable (black) or unstable (grey). Depending on the initial value of the x-axis, we
can distinguish between stable disease-free (type-I), outbreak and collapse (type-II),
and endemic (type-III) behavior, indicated by labels on the axis. The behaviour changes
at two threshold values (T1, T2)
which are marked by a local change in the stability of the manifold and the heteroclinic
connection. We note that this sketch has been simplified from the situation in the
epidemic model. If the x-axis was the a–a link density , the
type-II behavior would occur for intermediate values, whereas the type-III behavior
would occur at high values, which is harder to visualize in a 2d-plot, but qualitatively
similar.Let us emphasize that the x-axis in Fig. 9 cannot be
the variable as the
different types of behaviour would occur in a different order (cf. Fig. 6). The different order of sections when plotted over does not
imply qualitatively different dynamics but is more difficult to visualize in a
two-dimensional sketch.
SOLVABLE STYLIZED MODEL
Even the simplified ODE system discussed above has eleven degrees of freedom, and as such
it is difficult to analyse in detail. However, the basic phenomenon of inoculation via a
heteroclinic bifurcation can be captured in a solvable two-dimensional stylized model as we
now describe. We consider a well-mixed population with two susceptible types (denoted
S and S as previously) and a
single infective type I. To see inoculation without resolving the network
structure, it is necessary to introduce a new non-linear term to induce bistability. We keep
the same infection as above but make a modification to recovery: instead of spontaneous
recovery, infectious individuals may be coopted back to a susceptible state by interaction
with a pair of susceptible individuals of the same type.While the cooption to the susceptible type may seem strange at first glance, very similar
mechanisms are typically considered in threshold models of opinion formation, including, for
instance, an adaptive network model for opinion formation among locusts. While we intend the proposed model mainly as
an abstract illustration, one can imagine that very similar models can be relevant in
situations where both opinion formation and epidemic processes occur. This is the case, for
instance, when choices can be made that prevent infection (e.g., vaccination) or
transmission (e.g., hygiene and safer sex).The dynamics of the simplified model are captured by the rate equationsNote that the system is two-dimensional since is a conserved quantity. The
line is a manifold of fixed
points. Along the absorbing lines or , the system is reduced to
the one-dimensional ODE where . The form of this equation
already suggests the existence of a heteroclinic bifurcation. There are always steady states
at (extinction) and (endemic infection), with
the possibility of a third at . If this third steady state
lies in (0, 1) then it is a saddle, and the extinct and endemic states are stable. If it
lies outside the physically relevant region, then the extinct state is unstable.By choosing
appropriately, we are able to realise a situation in which there is a saddle on the line but not on . This structure motivates
the unusual non-linear choice made for recovery.The phase portrait of the system is shown in Fig. 10.
From the figure, perturbation around a state with has three possible outcomes.
For small , we have a
type-I region, where no outbreaks can occur. For large , the
trajectory is carried all the way to the stable endemic equilibrium at in a type-III scenario. In
between, there is a range of values for with
type-II trajectories that initially depart but then return to the line. This region is bounded
on the left by the point where the non-zero eigenvalue of the Jacobian matrix changes sign,
which we compute to be the point where solves
On the right, the type-II region is bounded by the
separatrix of the endemic and extinct states, which can be found by examining implying the separatrix .
FIG. 10.
Phase portrait for the simplified model. The phase portrait contains a manifold of
steady states (strong black line) at zero prevalence. In addition, there are two steady
states at non-zero prevalence (black dots). The lower of these two states is a saddle
whose stable manifold (red line) forms the separatrix between outbreak and endemic
behavior. This is illustrated by the flow field (blue arrows) and example trajectories
(thin blue lines). Parameters: .
Phase portrait for the simplified model. The phase portrait contains a manifold of
steady states (strong black line) at zero prevalence. In addition, there are two steady
states at non-zero prevalence (black dots). The lower of these two states is a saddle
whose stable manifold (red line) forms the separatrix between outbreak and endemic
behavior. This is illustrated by the flow field (blue arrows) and example trajectories
(thin blue lines). Parameters: .The results above allow us also to draw a phase diagram of the system (Fig. 11). In this diagram, stable disease-free behavior (type
I) is separated from epidemic behavior (type II and III) by a transcritical bifurcation,
while outbreak (type II) and epidemic (type III) behaviour are separated by the heteroclinic
bifurcation.
FIG. 11.
Phase diagram of the simplified model. Transcritical (solid line) and heteroclinic
(dashed line) bifurcation separated phases of qualitatively different behaviors: type I
(disease free, light grey), type II (outbreak and collapse, medium grey), and type III
(endemic, dark grey). Outbreaks take the system from the type-II region into the type-I
region (black arrow) and thus inoculate it against further outbreaks. Parameters: , and .
Phase diagram of the simplified model. Transcritical (solid line) and heteroclinic
(dashed line) bifurcation separated phases of qualitatively different behaviors: type I
(disease free, light grey), type II (outbreak and collapse, medium grey), and type III
(endemic, dark grey). Outbreaks take the system from the type-II region into the type-I
region (black arrow) and thus inoculate it against further outbreaks. Parameters: , and .Trajectories starting in the type-II phase lead to final states in the type-I phase. In
fact, the black arrow is the trajectory for . Again, we can think of
this kind of event as an inoculation, since the initial outbreak is crushed, and we are left
with fewer type A susceptibles so that future outbreaks need a much higher
β (around 1.8 in this case) to succeed.
CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, we investigated a previously proposed model for the spreading of a disease
across a network in the face of behavioral responses to the disease and intra-individual
heterogeneity of epidemic parameters. To understand the dynamics of this system, we used a
variety of tools, including agent-based simulation, percolation theory, moment expansions,
analytical bifurcation theory, numerical integration of ODEs, and continuation.Our results point to a phenomenon that we named network inoculation.
Introducing a disease into a given network may lead to an outbreak that collapses and leaves
the network with a different topology as agents have rewired their connections in response
to the disease. Although the altered topology will be generally more heterogeneous than the
initial topology, it is more resilient to disease outbreaks. In this sense, network
inoculation is strongly reminiscent of immunological inoculation as in both cases contact to
the pathogen leads to a response that hardens the system against future exposure to the
pathogen.Our analysis showed that the outbreak and collapse dynamics characteristics of network
inoculation occur in a region bordered by two phase transitions. When viewed from a
macroscopic perspective, one of these transitions is a transcritical bifurcation, whereas
the other is a saddle-heteroclinic bifurcation. Network inoculation thus provides a (rare)
example of a phenomenon where a global bifurcation causes a phase transition in a model that
can be understood both on the micro- and macroscale.We emphasize that network inoculation is not a peculiarity of the specific model studied
here. By contrast, we expect the phenomenon to occur in a wide variety of models as soon as
certain requirements are met. While the phenomenon may as well occur in other models, let us
for consistency summarise the requirements of network inoculation in epidemic terms. Network
inoculation can occur if there isa disease-free attractor (inoculated outcome),an endemic attractor (endemic outcome), anda variety of unstable disease-free states (initial states).The actual inoculation strictly speaking only requires conditions 1 and 3, whereas
condition 2 makes the onset of inoculation via a heteroclinic bifurcation possible.If the first two conditions are met, there will be generally a saddle of some sort whose
stable manifold marks the separatrix between the basins of the two attractors. Network
inoculation will occur if the initial state is in (or on) the basin of the inoculated
outcome. When parameters are changed, the separatrix will generally move, which can cause an
initial state to enter or leave the basin of the inoculated outcome, in a heteroclinic
bifurcation.The conditions above require a bistability between an endemic (1) and a disease-free (2)
state. While such bistability is not observed in the most simple models, it is very common
in even slightly more complex models. In particular, this bistability has been observed in
numerous variants of the adaptive SIS models. It therefore seems to be a robust feature of
epidemiological models that appears once behavioral responses to the disease are
modelled.Furthermore, we require the existence of multiple disease-free states with different
stability properties. While the simplest epidemiological models have only a single
disease-free state, multiple disease-free states naturally appear as soon as an additional
macroscopic variable exists.Network inoculation was not observed in the previous investigations of the adaptive SIS
models. While this model shows robust bistability, it has only a unique disease free state
and hence does not meet the requirements of network inoculation. Likewise, network
inoculation was not observed in the previous models of epidemics in heterogeneous
populations. In these models, there are naturally multiple disease-free states which differ
in the connectivity of the different classes of individuals. However, because these previous
models did not consider adaptive rewiring of links, the connectivities of the different
classes of agents are parameters, rather than dynamical variables. Thus, the different
disease-free states are not observed simultaneously for one choice of parameters, hence
again inoculation-type dynamics cannot occur.Once intra-individual heterogeneity and adaptive network rewiring are both considered,
multiple disease free states that differ in the connectivity of classes of individuals occur
robustly. Because adaptive rewiring can change these connectivities, they are now dynamical
variables, and the multiple disease-free states can be observed simultaneously, for a given
set of the remaining parameters. When multiple disease-free states exist, the generic
expectation is that they will have different stability properties at least in some region of
the parameter space, and thus there will, in general, be a parameter region where the
conditions for network inoculation in the narrow sense are met.Because bistability between endemic and disease free states has proven to be a very robust
feature of adaptive epidemiological models, we can moreover expect the onset of network
inoculation via the heteroclinic bifurcation to be a common phenomenon. Both ingredients,
the adaptive response of the network to the disease and intra-individual heterogeneity, are
known to exist in the real world. In the light of the arguments above, we expect network
inoculation, and its onset via the heteroclinic bifurcation to occur whenever these two
ingredients are combined in the same model.Thus, it seems that the reason why network inoculation has not been observed in the past is
not the phenomenon itself is rare, but rather that the models that have been studied so far
have been too strongly simplified to capture this, potentially common, phenomenon.
Authors: Iain D Couzin; Christos C Ioannou; Güven Demirel; Thilo Gross; Colin J Torney; Andrew Hartnett; Larissa Conradt; Simon A Levin; Naomi E Leonard Journal: Science Date: 2011-12-16 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Franco M Neri; Francisco J Pérez-Reche; Sergei N Taraskin; Christopher A Gilligan Journal: J R Soc Interface Date: 2010-07-14 Impact factor: 4.118