Back to search
2203.02011

The starting dates of COVID-19 multiple waves

Paulo Roberto de Lima Gianfelice, Ricardo Sovek Oyarzabal, Americo Cunha Jr, Jose Mario Vicensi Grzybowski, Fernando da Conceição Batista, Elbert E. N. Macau

correctmedium confidence
Category
Not specified
Journal tier
Specialist/Solid
Processed
Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM

Audit review

The paper’s procedure first applies an evidence screen to discard models whose inferred cases start-date upper bound is later than March 1, 2020, leaving τ ∈ {120,121,122,123}. It then selects among these using AIC/BIC (lowest) and, if needed, RMSE and R², choosing τ = 121 and concluding a first-wave cases upper-bound start date of February 29, 2020. The paper also reports upper-bound start dates for waves 2–6 as July 17, 2020; November 6, 2020; March 2, 2021; March 16, 2021; and July 9, 2021. The candidate solution reproduces these steps and results exactly, including the elimination set, the tie-break, the selected τ, and the listed start dates for waves 2–6. All of this matches the paper’s text, tables, and figures. See the evidence-screen and selection narrative, including the survivor set and tie-break to τ = 121 with cases upper bound on Feb 29, 2020, and the list of later-wave start upper bounds in the results section and figures.

Referee report (LaTeX)

\textbf{Recommendation:} minor revisions

\textbf{Journal Tier:} specialist/solid

\textbf{Justification:}

The paper’s methodology is sound and its results align with surveillance evidence. The ensemble-and-screen approach is simple and implementable, and the selection outcomes are well supported by tables and figures. Clarifying the hypothesis testing step and the rationale for a fixed 11-day shift across all waves would improve transparency and robustness.