Initial Model for the Impact of Social Distancing on CoVID-19 Spread

The initial stages of the CoVID-19 coronavirus pandemic all around the world exhibit a nearly exponential rise in the number of infections with time. Planners, governments, and agencies are scrambling to (cid:133)gure out " How much? How bad? " and how to e⁄ectively treat the potentially large numbers of simultaneously sick people. Modeling the CoVID-19 pandemic using an exponential rise implicitly assumes a nearly unlimited population of uninfected persons ( "dilute pandemic" ). Once a signi(cid:133)cant fraction of the population is infected ( "saturated pandemic" ), an exponential growth no longer applies. A new model is developed here, which modi(cid:133)es the standard exponential growth function to account for factors such as Social Distancing . A Social Mitigation Parameter [SMP] (cid:11) S is introduced to account for these types of society-wide changes, which can modify the standard exponential growth function, as follows: The doubling-time t dbl = (ln 2) =K o can also be used to substitute for K o , giving a { t dbl ; (cid:11) S } parameter pair for comparing to actual CoVID-19 data. This model shows how the number of CoVID-19 infections can self-limit before reaching a saturated pandemic level. It also provides estimates for: (a) the timing of the pandemic peak , (b) the maximum number of new daily cases that would be expected, and (c) the expected total number of CoVID-19 cases. This model shows fairly good agreement with the presently available CoVID-19 pandemic data for several individual States, and the for the USA as a whole ( 6 Figures ), as well as for various countries around the World ( 9 Figures ). An augmented model with two Mitigation Parameters , (cid:11) S and (cid:12) S , is also developed, which can give better agreement with the daily new CoVID-19 data. Data-to-model comparisons also indicate that using (cid:11) S by itself likely provides a worst-case estimate, while using both (cid:11) S and (cid:12) S likely provides a best-case estimate for the CoVID-19 spread.


Introduction
The Coronavirus 2019 disease , caused by the SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2) pathogen, is now a world-wide pandemic. In many localities, the number of cases N (t) was found to have an initial period of nearly exponential growth: [1.1b] aside of the …rst few cases, which may be untraceable. In Eqs. [1.1a]-[1.1b], N o is the initial number of infections at the t = 0 start of data tracking, K D is an exponential growth factor, and t D is the doubling-time. Each locality can have its own fN o ; t D ; t = 0g values, and K D and t D should be nearly constant during this initial period of CoVID-19 spread.
Standard epidemiology identi…es the number of people N G a known infected individual had recent contact with. Contacts of that N G group are tracked next, followed by additional tracking stages. This process sets the K D value.
Society-wide Mitigation Measures such as: (a) Social Distancing, (b) wearing face masks in public, (c) prohibiting large gatherings, (d) implementing largescale population testing, (e) disinfecting high-touch surfaces in public areas, (f) enhanced cleaning of items brought into homes, and (g) minimizing human contact with likely virus-containing materials and matter; all can help reduce N (t) growth. These Mitigation Measures can modify the Eq. [1.1a] epidemiology model by causing the local t D values to lengthen. In order to model these Mitigation Measures, t D and K D become explicit functions of time, t D (t) and K D (t). Using a linear function for t D (t) lengthening is one of the simplest time-varying extensions. A linear function of time also corresponds to the …rst term of a Taylors'Series expansion of some more general t D (t) analytic function, giving this epidemiology extension: t D (t) t dbl (1 + S t ) , [1.3a] K D (t) (ln 2) t D (t) = (ln 2) = [t dbl (1 + S t )] K o = (1 + S t ) .
[1.3b] The t = 0 initial values for t D (t) and K D (t) become the new constants t dbl and K o , which characterize the initial exponential growth phase. The S coe¢ cient in Eq. [1.3a] is a new Social Mitigation Parameter [SMP] that helps quantify the e¤ectiveness of the society-wide Mitigation Measures as a whole.
The S value expresses how well non-infected people manage to avoid the virus contagion. As a lumped parameter, it likely re ‡ects an average value over many processes, known and unknown, which comprise mitigation, to supplement the contact-to-contact tracking that initially sets t dbl or K o .
Substituting Eq. [1.3b] into Eq. [1.1a] gives: [1.4] as one of the simplest models for CoVID-19 spread. A pure exponential growth (or decay) has no memory, while Eq. [1.4], for S > 0, has a memory. The t = 0 start time of …rst mitigation changes the future history. To include t < 0 requires replacing Eq. [1.3a] by t D (t) t dbl (1 + max[0; S t ] ), which has a corner at t = 0 that preserves the memory of when mitigation …rst started.

Model Features
The Eq. [1.1a] exponential growth pandemic model implicitly assumes a large uninfected population allows the disease to easily spread ("dilute pandemic"). When almost everybody is infected ("saturated pandemic"), exponential growth shuts o¤, and Eq. [1.1a] no longer applies.
On 3/10/2020, German Chancellor Angela Merkel 1 noted that she "estimates that 60% to 70% of the German population will contract the coronavirus", indicating that saturated pandemic models are being considered as a worst-case.
Even that worst-case condition assumes: (i) recovered coronavirus patients are no longer infectious, and (ii) surviving a CoVID-19 infection confers absolute immunity to re-infection. Recently, South Korea 2 found 91 cases of clinically recovered patients later testing as CoVID-19 positive. They may also shed viable coronaviruses in their phlegm and fecal matter 3 , furthering disease spread. Although these e¤ects are not modeled here, those additional transmission modes could turn a 60%-70% hope into a 99+% consequence.
setting an average value for the total number of all follow-on infections arising from a single individual. Since it depends only on the ratio of the original pandemic growth factor K o to the S SMP, this model shows the impact of accounting for a broader environment beyond individual contact tracking.
The early spread of CoVID-19 cases outside of China 4 , and the early USA CoVID-19 data 5 both had nearly exponential rises, as shown in Figure 1 The slowing of CoVID-19 spread by implementing large-scale societal Mitigation Measures can be fairly rapid, as illustrated by the USA CoVID-19 data of Figure 2, which covers March 2020.
The impact of these multi-state Mitigation Measures is evident in Figure 2 as a sudden transition on the log-plot from a straight-line to having downward curvature, which the S Social Mitigation Parameter (SMP) aims to quantify. The local slope in Figure 2 also decreases right after the onset of Mitigation Measures, indicating further slowing of CoVID-19 spread.
3 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review) for the number of infections per person, a 16:6 X reduction from 4; 482 .
Since N (t) in Eq. [1.4] represents a total number of cases, it is similar to a cumulative distribution function (cdf ), which is used in reliability and also has time as its fundamental variable. The derivative of Eq. [1.4], dN (t) = dt, is analogous to an unnormalized probability density function (pdf ), which can be used to predict a pandemic peak : now approaches a …nite value for all S > 0, this new fpdf g asymptotic limit: Lim also results. The fpdf g that arises from this model all have an initial exponential rise, coupled with the Eq. [2.6] "long tail " at large times, which means that new CoVID-19 cases may arise for a long time, even if signi…cant Mitigation Measures are in place.
The Eq. [2.6] fpdf g prediction also di¤ers substantially from the widely-used University of Washington IHME (Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation) projections, which use symmetric Gaussians for both the fpdf g rise and fall 6 . Thus, these methods provide an alternative risk-bound for evaluating potential CoVID-19 worst-case scenarios.

4
. CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted May 8, 2020. .

Determining {t dbl ; S } from CoVID-19 Data
Explicit numerical values for {t dbl ; S } parameters were determined from the CoVID-19 data as follows. Rewriting Eq. [1.4] as: [3.1] allowed data …tting to be done on a Y vs X log-plot, using Y = ln[N (t) = N o ] as the ordinate and X $ t as the abscissa, to calculate and minimize the root-mean-square (rms) error. The To best model Mitigation Measures, this point was usually chosen at the start of a downward curvature on a log-plot, so that N (t = 0) N I , where the N I is now the …rst data point in the analysis. The prior t < 0 regime can often have a nearly pure exponential growth, as in Figure 2, and those regions should not be part of rms-error minimization for evaluating Mitigation Measures.
The N F …nal data point, measured at the most recent t = t F time: [3.2] was also …xed for each dataset, so that only {t dbl ; S } value pairs that meet both N (t = 0) N I and Eq. [3.2] were used.
In practice, an S was chosen …rst. The Excel T M _Tools_Goal-Seek function was used to adjust t dbl to obey Eq. [3.2], setting the rms-error between the dataset and Eq. [3.1], with the …nal {t dbl ; S } having the least rms-error.
In the following …gures, all CoVID-19 raw data came from the publicly available Microsoft TM "COVID-19 Tracker " site 7 . When no updates were available, that site repeated the prior day data, whereas we used the geometric mean of the day-prior and day-after data for interpolation.

E¤ects of Varying the Initial Zero-Time Point
Starting with: 1c] using a shifted time-scale normalization point is examined next: , with a shifted time axis: t = t 0 + t A , but the best …t parameter numerical values change. Since: [4.3b] then de…ning: 5 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted May 8, 2020. . https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.04.20091207 doi: medRxiv preprint Finally, for small t 0 , where A t 0 < 1, using Eqs. [4.1b] and [4.5] gives: are used to parameterize a given data set, the net overall function …t and predictions, as a function of calendar date, should remain fairly self-consistent, even when some ambiguity exists as to when Mitigation Measures …rst were noticeably e¤ective.

USA and Selected States Model Results
The model predictions for CoVID-19 spread in the USA is shown in Figure 3. This analysis only included data after mid-March 2020, when several State Governors …rst instituted mandatory Mitigation Measures. Results give an SMP estimate of S 0:5945=day, a USA initial doubling-time of t initial dbl 2:1758 days, which lengthens to t fat P eakg dbl 5:83 days at the projected pandemic peak of~4/19/2020. The predicted total number of CoVID-19 cases is~5; 464; 000 , giving a projected~1:67% …nal infection rate, if the present level of Mitigation Measures or their equivalent, are continued.
These predictions assume no "second wave" of infection or re-infection. They also do not include the e¤ect of additional Mitigation Measures, which could further increase the {t dbl ; S } values, and signi…cantly reduce the projected …nal number of CoVID-19 cases. Figure 4 shows model predictions for CoVID-19 evolution in California. Only data after 3/21/2020 was included in the analysis, after California Governor Gavin Newsom instituted mandatory Mitigation Measures. It gives an SMP estimate of S 0:03546=day, with an initial doubling-time of t initial dbl 2:5017 days, which lengthens to t fat P eakg dbl 9:774 days at the projected pandemic peak of~6/07/2020. The predicted total number of CoVID-19 cases is 1; 123; 700 , giving a projected~2:813% …nal infection rate, at the present level of Mitigation Measures. Figure 5 shows model predictions for CoVID-19 evolution in New York. A relatively high SMP estimate of S 0:1031=day was found, coupled with a relatively short initial doubling-time of t initial dbl 0:9395 days, which creates a high narrow spike in daily new cases. The present model projects a New York pandemic peak around 4/10/2020, with an estimated at-peak doubling-time of 6 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted May 8, 2020. . https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.04.20091207 doi: medRxiv preprint t fat P eakg dbl 3:36 days. The predicted total number of cases at~1; 218; 000 , giving a projected~6:072% …nal infection rate. Figure 6 shows model predictions for CoVID-19 evolution in Washington State. An initial doubling-time of t initial dbl 2:189 days and an SMP value of S 0:0687=day were found, with a projected pandemic peak around 6/04/2020. The relatively low number of cases at the Mitigation Measures start helps to give a predicted total number of cases of~557; 600, corresponding to ã 7:15% …nal infection rate. Figure 7 shows model predictions for CoVID-19 evolution in Illinois. An initial doubling-time of t initial dbl 2:457 days and moderate SMP value of S 0:0373=day combine to give a projected pandemic peak around 6/04/2020, similar to Washington State, but having a higher predicted total number of cases at~1; 277; 000 , and a projected~11:47% …nal infection rate. Figure 8 shows model predictions for CoVID-19 evolution in Florida. Many Florida counties instituted their own Mitigation Measures prior to a state-wide lockdown, slowing CoVID-19 growth. A somewhat high SMP value of S 0:0526=day, and an initial doubling-time of t initial dbl 1:494 days results. A pandemic peak is estimated at around 5/20/2020, with a predicted total number of cases at~1; 090; 000 , and a projected~4:96% …nal infection rate. Figure 9 shows model predictions of CoVID-19 evolution for the whole World. The present-day doubling-time value of t initial dbl 5:761 days likely represents a combination of small urban, large urban, and rural area results. However, the calculated low SMP estimate of S 0:01712=day shows that nearly~4:43% of the World's population could be at risk for eventual CoVID-19 infection. At these present levels, the projected pandemic peak is around 8/15/2020, with potentially hundreds of millions of people being infected. Figure 10 shows model predictions for CoVID-19 evolution in China, covering their "…rst wave" of early exposure and early mitigation. Data were included that was prior to a "New Reporting Method " being used, which started o¤ with one sudden data jump, and nearly level CoVID-19 follow-on results. The present model predicts what number of cases could have resulted, had the reporting method not changed. Draconian Mitigation Measures helped to contain the pandemic to Hubei Province and Wuhan. These projections show that those Mitigation Measures have impressively contained CoVID-19 spread. Figure 11 shows model predictions for CoVID-19 evolution in South Korea, covering the period of their country's early exposure and initial mitigation methods. Pre-pandemic Mitigation Measures, including extensive contact-tracing and large-scale CoVID-19 testing, were implemented. These projections show that those Mitigation Measures, as an alternative to China's methods, also have impressively contained CoVID-19 spread. Figure 12 shows model predictions for CoVID-19 evolution in Italy. An initial doubling-time of t initial dbl 1:4648 days and SMP estimate of S 7 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted May 8, 2020. . https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.04.20091207 doi: medRxiv preprint 0:05282=day give a pandemic peak around 4/29/2020, with a predicted number of total cases at~1; 764; 000 , and a projected~2:92% …nal infection rate. Figure 13 shows model predictions for CoVID-19 evolution in Germany. The relatively high SMP estimate of S 0:07614=day with an initial doublingtime of t initial dbl 1:4177 days combine to give a projected pandemic peak at around 4/08/2020, with a predicted total number of cases of~700; 100 , and a projected~0:84% …nal infection rate. These values would make Germany one of the less impacted countries in Europe. They represent predicted …nal CoVID-19 infection rates that are signi…cantly lower than the original 60% 70% early worst-case estimates highlighted by German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Figure 14 shows model predictions for CoVID-19 evolution in Spain. An SMP estimate of S 0:07058=day, which is comparable to Germany, and a smaller initial doubling-time of t initial dbl 1:1778 days combine to give more predicted CoVID-19 cases than Germany. The estimated pandemic peak is around 4/21/2020, with a predicted number of total cases at~1; 526; 000 , and a projected~3:26% …nal infection rate. Figure 15 shows model predictions for CoVID-19 evolution in Ecuador. Reports of chaos in Ecuador have been alarming. Yet the present data show a signi…cant and somewhat unexpected leveling o¤ in the number of reported CoVID-19 cases. This result could mean that some as yet unknown Mitigation Measures may be operating. Alternatively, the data could mean that there is a dire CoVID-19 testing and reporting shortfall operating amidst the chaos. Figure 16 shows model predictions for CoVID-19 evolution in India. These initial data show virtually no mitigation at present, having one of the lowest calculated SMP estimates of S 0:0148=day, with an initial doubling-time of t initial dbl 3:135 days. At this rate, nearly 17:38% of the population of India could eventually become infected. The estimated pandemic peak is around 5/30/2021, which would be 441 days after the …rst CoVID-19 fatality was reported, on 3/14/2020. Additional Mitigation Measures, further increasing the {t dbl ; S } values, as well as adding in additional modeling parameters may signi…cantly reduce these projected number of CoVID-19 cases.

Augmented Peak Shape Modeling
Using a new Social Mitigation Parameter [SMP] S , as in Eq. [1.3a], successfully models pandemic shut-o¤, even in the dilute pandemic limit. However, as the Figures 3-16 insets show, many of the data-vs-model comparisons have the data trending above the model near the …nal t = t F data point.
Since Eq. [1.3a] for t D (t) is linear, using an Additional Modeling Parameter [AMP] S in a higher order polynomial, may …t the fpdf g shape better. A quadratic function for t D : 8 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted May 8, 2020. .
Values of S > 0 in Eq. [5.2] allow the predicted [N (t) = N o ] values to rise above the S = 0 model predictions, and to have a smaller doubling-time, for the same {t dbl ; S }. However, the best …t {t dbl ; S } values will also di¤er between the S > 0 and 0 cases, so these changes are relative. The new fpdf g function for Eq. [5.2] is: [5.5] An an example, this augmented model was applied to CoVID-19 evolution in Italy. As shown in Figure 17, this Eq. [5.3] fpdf g function gives a better …t to the observed number of daily new CoVID-19 cases.
The initial doubling-time of t initial dbl 2:5566 days, along with estimates for the Mitigation Measure parameters of S 0:04583=day and S 0:1725, in this augmented model, combine to signi…cantly reduce the projected maximum number of CoVID-19 cases down to~264; 820, which is an~7X less compared to using S alone, as in Figure 12. This augmented model sets an estimated pandemic peak at 3/29/2020, with a projected pandemic end-point around 7/7/2020, which is also signi…cantly more optimistic.
The true CoVID-19 pandemic progress is likely to be in between Figure 12 as a worst-case, and Figure 17 as a best-case projection. The geometric mean of the Figure 12 and Figure 17 results set an average of~683; 500 cases for Italy at the CoVID-19 pandemic end. These bounds also highlight the amount of uncertainty that is intrinsic to these empirically based methods.

Summary and Conclusions
The standard exponential for modeling pandemics starts with an N o known number of initial cases at some reference time t = 0. Epidemiologists work to determine a pandemic growth factor K D , which sets the doubling-time t D for the number of pandemic cases.
The CoVID-19 disease, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pathogen, initially showed both regional and global exponential growth. It resulted in a doubling-time of t D 2:02 days for the US, as highlighted in Figure 1.
An exponential growth normally only halts when it runs out of materials. In epidemiology that point often occurs when there are virtually no more uninfected people left, which we call a saturated pandemic. The exponential growth function is only applicable when infection rates are much lower than saturation, which we call a dilute pandemic.
A modi…cation to exponential growth is developed here, which allows ratio of the number of pandemic cases, N (t), compared to its N o initial value at t = 0: Lim . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted May 8, 2020. . to approach a …nal constant, denoted M, while still being in a dilute pandemic condition. This result is attributed to the inclusion of society-wide Mitigation Measures to stop pandemic growth, before the value of M reaches the whole population value.
Society-wide Mitigation Measures aim to progressively lengthen the t D doublingtime, essentially making t D (t). Most analyses presented here used a linear function of time as a simplest non-constant model for t D (t): Here, S is a new Social Mitigation Parameter (SMP), to quantify societal Mitigation Measures. This Eq. [6.2a] extension of a pure exponential growth gives: which combines an initial exponential rise with "long tail " at large times. In this model, new CoVID-19 cases can continue to arise for a long time, even with signi…cant Mitigation Measures in place.
Analysis of available CoVID-19 data using this model shows that it can match observed data fairly well, both from various US states [ Figures 3-8], as well as for di¤erent global countries [ Figures 9-17]. However, using a single parameter to encompass all societal Mitigation Measures often gives a slightly larger slope on a log-plot, compared to the latest measured data values, which makes this model a likely worst-case estimate.
A second data-…tting parameter S was also used in an augmented model, to better …t the fpdf g data: 6c] where t EN D becomes an estimated pandemic end-point, where zero new CoVID-19 cases per day could occur.
As a representative example, this augmented model was applied to the CoVID-19 data from Italy [ Figure 17]. Those results show that this augmented model allows a better …t to the observed number of new daily CoVID-19 cases, but the absence of a CoVID-19 tail in its fpdf g function makes this {K o ; S ; S } augmented model a likely best-case result, with the original {K o ; S } model being a likely worst-case estimate.

10
. CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.

(which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted May 8, 2020. . This class of CoVID-19 pandemic models all enable pandemic shut-o¤ even in the dilute pandemic limit, with only a small fraction of the total population being infected. These models also provide estimates for: (a) the maximum number of cases near pandemic shuto¤, (b) the size and shape of the pandemic peak [dN (t) = dt], and (c) pandemic peak timing [t P ]. These models and analyses may help enhance planning and preparation to maximize resource use, potentially increasing individual and collective CoVID-19 pandemic survival rates.          Figure 10: Predicted CHINA CoVID-19 results, using pre-"New Reporting Method " data. Draconian Mitigation Measures helped to contain pandemic to Hubei Province and Wuhan. Figure 11: Predicted SOUTH KOREA CoVID-19 results. Pre-pandemic contact-tracing and large-scale CoVID-19 testing as Mitigation Measures have contained the pandemic. Figure 12: Predicted ITALY CoVID-19 results. Additional curvature in the actual CoVID-19 data vs Model makes these predictions a likely worst-case. Figure 13: Predicted GERMANY CoVID-19 results. This model gives a 11 . CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review) The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted May 8, 2020. . more gradual function for the Daily New CoVID-19 cases, making these predictions a likely worst-case. Figure 14: Predicted SPAIN CoVID-19 results. This model gives a more gradual function for Daily New CoVID-19 cases, making these predictions a likely worst-case. Figure 15: Predicted ECUADOR CoVID-19 results. Reports of chaos in Ecuador have been alarming. Poor CoVID-19 tracking and low testing may have skewed these results. Figure 16: Predicted INDIA CoVID-19 results. Data shows only minimal mitigation at present. Further mitigations should help make these predictions a worst-case result. Figure 17: Predicted ITALY CoVID-19 results, using an augmented 2parameter { S ; S } Social Mitigation model. Total number of CoVID-19 cases is much less than Figure 12, but the model post-peak drop is much steeper, making this a likely best-case result.

References
. CC-BY 4.0 International license It is made available under a is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review) The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted May 8, 2020. .