DOE OSTI2020
I describe $SIR$ modeling of the COVID-19 pandemic in two U.S. urban environments, New York City (NYC) and Cook County, IL, from onset through the month of June, 2020. Since testing was not widespread early in the pandemic in the U.S., I do not use data on confirmed cases and rely solely on public fatality data to estimate model parameters. Fits to the first 20 days of data determine a degenerate combination of the basic reproduction number, $R_0$, and the mean time to removal from the infectious population, $\gamma^{-1}$, with $\gamma (R_0-1) = 0.25 (0.21)$ inverse days for NYC (Cook County). Equivalently, the initial doubling time was $t_d = 2.8 (3.4)$ days for NYC (Cook). The early fatality data suggest that both locations had infections in early February. I model the mitigation measures implemented in mid-March in both locations (distancing, quarantine, isolation, etc) via a time-dependent reproduction number $R_t$ that declines monotonically from $R_0$ to a sma ller asymptotic value, with a parameterized functional form. The timing (mid-March) and duration (several days) of the transitions in $R_t$ appear well determined by the data. However, the fatality data determine only a degenerate combination of the parameters $R_0$, the percentage reduction in social contact due to mitigation measures, $X$, and the infection fatality rate (IFR), $f$. With flat priors, based on simulations the NYC model parameters have 95.45\% credible intervals of $R_0 = 3.0-5.4$, $X= 80-99.9\%$ and $f=2-6\%$, with $5-13\%$ of the population asymptotically infected. A strong external prior indicating a lower value of $f$ or of $\gamma^{-1}$ would imply lower values of $R_0$ and $X$ and higher percentage infection of the population. For Cook County, the evolution was qualitatively different: after mitigation measures were implemented, the daily fatality counts reached a plateau for about a month before tailing off. This is consistent with an $SIR$ model that exhibits ``critical slowing-down", in which $R_t$ plateaus ! at a value just above unity. For Cook County, the 95.45\% credible intervals for the model parameters are much broader and shifted downward, $R_0=1.4-4.7$, $X=26-54\%$, and $f=0.1-0.6\%$ with $15-88\%$ of the population asymptotically infected. Despite the apparently lower efficacy of its social contact reduction measures, Cook County has had significantly fewer fatalities per population than NYC, $D_\infty/N=100$ vs. 270 per 100,000. In the model, this is attributed to the lower inferred IFR for Cook; an external prior pointing to similar values of the IFR for the two locations would instead chalk up the difference in $D/N$ to differences in the relative growth rate of the disease. I derive a model-dependent threshold, $X^{crit}_e$, for `safe' re-opening, that is, for easing of contact reduction that would not trigger a second wave; for NYC, the models predict that increasing social contact by more than 20\% from post-mitigation levels will lead to renewed spread, while for Cook County the threshold value is very uncertain, given the parameter degeneracies. The timing of 2nd-wave growth will depend on the amplitude of contact increase relative to $X^{crit}_e$ and on the asymptotic growth rate, and the impact in terms of fatalities will depend on the parameter $f$.