| Literature DB >> 35693260 |
Linlin Li1,2, Zhiyi Fang1, Hongning Zhou3, Yerong Tang3, Xin Wang2, Geng Liang2, Fengjun Zhang2,4.
Abstract
Dengue as an acute infectious disease threatens global public health and has sparked broad research interest. However, existing studies generally ignore the spatial dependencies involved in dengue forecast, and consideration of temporal periodicity is absent. In this work, we propose a spatiotemporal component fusion model (STCFM) to solve the dengue risk forecast issue. Considering that mosquitoes are an important vector of dengue transmission, we introduce feature factors involving mosquito abundance and spatiotemporal lags to model temporal trends and spatial distributions separately on the basis of statistical properties. Specifically, we conduct multiscale modeling of temporal dependencies to enhance the forecast capability of relevant periods by capturing the historical variation patterns of the data across different segments in the temporal dimension. In the spatial dimension, we quantify the multivariate spatial correlation analysis as additional features to strengthen the spatial feature representation and adopt the ConvLSTM model to learn spatial dependencies adequately. The final forecast results are obtained by stacking strategy fusion in ensemble learning. We conduct experiments on real dengue datasets. The results indicate that STCFM improves prediction accuracy through effective spatiotemporal feature representations and outperforms candidate models with a reasonable component construction strategy.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35693260 PMCID: PMC9184161 DOI: 10.1155/2022/2515432
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Math Methods Med ISSN: 1748-670X Impact factor: 2.809
Figure 1Abstract schematic diagram of spatiotemporal dependence.
Figure 2Data preprocessing flowchart.
Figure 3Model component structure of STCFM.
Figure 4LSTM framework.
Figure 5Multiscale time series segment construction.
Figure 6Multivariate spatial correlation visualization.
Figure 7ConvLSTM framework.
Forecast performance comparison with different models.
| Model | RMSE (week) |
| RMSE (day) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HA | 48.64 | 0.58 | 6.05 | 0.70 |
| ARIMA | 69.02 | 0.18 | 10.16 | 0.19 |
| SVR | 58.36 | 0.39 | 7.17 | 0.58 |
| XGBoost | 48.99 | 0.57 | 7.05 | 0.59 |
| CNN | 43.44 | 0.66 | 5.72 | 0.73 |
| LSTM | 42.18 | 0.68 | 5.61 | 0.74 |
| STCFM | 34.88 | 0.78 | 4.65 | 0.83 |
Figure 8Variation in R2 for different candidate models as the forecast step length increases.
Figure 9Performance comparison of different component combinations.