arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1512.03132

Assessing Google Correlate Queries for Influenza H1N1 Surveillance in Asian Developing Countries

Xichuan Zhou·Qin Li·Han Zhao·Shengli Li·Lei Yu·Fang Tang·Shengdong Hu·Guojun Li·Yujie Feng
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

So far, Google Trend data have been used for influenza surveillance in many European and American countries; however, there are few attempts to apply the low-cost surveillance method in Asian developing countries. To investigate the correlation between the search trends and the influenza activity in Asia, we examined the Google query data of four Asian developing countries.

Explore related subjects

cs.CY

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Xichuan Zhou, Qin Li, Han Zhao, Shengli Li, Lei Yu, Fang Tang, Shengdong Hu, Guojun Li, Yujie Feng. 2015-12-10. Assessing Google Correlate Queries for Influenza H1N1 Surveillance in Asian Developing Countries. https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.03132

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

AI Debris: Residual Risk and the Afterlife of Failed AI Systems

AI governance frameworks primarily focus on risks during the development and deployment phases, implicitly treating system withdrawal as merely a technical shutdown. This paper argues that decommissioned AI systems generate residual risk, termed "AI debris", that persists after models are removed and continues to shape institutional behaviour, accountability, and trust. AI debris is defined as the post-withdrawal socio-technical residue of AI systems, including workflow dependency, data contamination, capability displacement (deskilling), legitimacy erosion, and accountability breakdown. It is distinguished from adjacent concepts such as technical debt and safety-critical post-incident review on the grounds of temporal locus and institutional scope. The paper develops a typology of six debris domains and explains the mechanisms by which debris persists through institutional memory, path dependency, blame avoidance, and feedback effects within organisational data. To operationalise the concept, it proposes an evaluator-ready AI Debris Decommissioning Protocol (AIDP), a stepwise checklist specifying auditable evidence for freezing decision footprints, incident review, remediation, contestability, and post-withdrawal accountability assignment. It also examines the incentive conditions, including external enforcement through procurement or regulation and protected disclosure, under which such a protocol is plausibly adopted. The paper contributes a practical governance instrument for regulators, auditors, and organisations seeking to prevent "paper compliance", strengthen AI lifecycle governance, and improve institutional resilience in high-stakes decision environments.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2026

Formalising and Implementing Grassroots Social Contracts: From Legal Text to Grassroots Platforms (Full Version)

Two centuries ago Pierre-Joseph Proudhon envisioned a social contract that is (1) an agreement of man with man; (2) reciprocal; (3) imposing no obligation upon the parties except that which results from their personal promise; (4) subject to no external authority; (5) freely accepted and signed by all the participants; (6) of the nature of a contract of exchange. He also envisioned a property of social contracts, analogous to a property of digital platforms we term grassroots: that one could "make a contract with all, as ... with some"; digitally, that a grassroots platform can have multiple instances, which may coalesce by mutual consent. We define grassroots social contracts as social contracts meeting these conditions and that (7) people are free to deal with each other; and (8) there is no external register of people. We show that a grassroots social contract can be transformed into a working grassroots platform through an abstraction cascade, from the contract text to formal act schemas, verified syntactically to be grassroots, and then to volition-guarded multiagent atomic transactions. Act schemas are a formal language for the acts the contract describes, each naming the parties' roles, which of them must will the act, and its precondition and effect at each role. Any contract written in this language meets the eight conditions, provided it is syntactically grassroots, satisfying three decidable conditions, Introduction, Provenance and Volition. We prove that the protocol realising a syntactically grassroots contract is grassroots, and volitionally so. Clauses of a grassroots social contract are of three legal types: a breach of an enforced clause is impossible with a correct implementation; a breach of an attested or undertaken clause can be taken to court, with signed evidence for an attested clause. We illustrate them with a grassroots social graph and grassroots currencies.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2026

A latent dimension of Condorcet's jury theorem for multiple AI advisers

When the same question is asked of multiple AI advisers, as in self-consistency and LLM-as-a-judge panels, Condorcet's jury theorem predicts that adding independent, competent advisers makes the majority more reliable. The theorem, however, has a latent dimension when viewed from the user's vantage: adding advisers also makes disagreement more visible. A binomial model reveals that this ``visible dissent'' becomes nearly inevitable as the number of advisers grows, and that reliability and disagreement both approach certainty but at different convergence rates. The two rates cross at an adviser accuracy of 4/5 (0.8). Below this value, visible dissent approaches certainty faster than reliability and, with enough advisers, becomes more likely than a correct majority. Even ideal panels of independent and competent advisers can be correct in aggregate but appear divided; such disagreement does not by itself indicate aggregation failure. The way advisers split also provides a common basis for predictive multiplicity, reconciliation load, and reliance miscalibration. These results indicate two distinct decisions when using multiple AI advisers: how many advisers to consult and how their verdicts should be presented and interpreted.

cs.CY↗