From Policy to Prediction: Assessing Forecasting Accuracy in an Integrated Framework with Machine Learning and...

To improve the forecasting accuracy of the spread of infectious diseases, a hybrid model was recently introduced where the commonly assumed constant disease transmission rate was actively estimated from enforced mitigating policy data by a machine learning (ML) model and then fed to an extended susceptible-infected-recovered model to forecast the number of infected cases. Testing only one ML model, that is, gradient boosting model (GBM), the work left open whether other ML models would perform better. Here, we compared GBMs, linear regressions, k-nearest neighbors, and Bayesian networks (BNs) in forecasting the number of COVID-19-infected cases in the United States and Canadian provinces based on policy indices of future 35 days. There was no significant difference in the mean absolute percentage errors of these ML models over the combined dataset [$$]. In two provinces, a significant difference was observed [$$], yet posthoc tests revealed no significant difference in pairwise comparisons. Nevertheless, BNs significantly outperformed the other models in most of the training datasets. The results put forward that the ML models have equal forecasting power overall, and BNs are best for data-fitting applications.