The Rules of Contagion

(Greg DeLong) #1

  1. Lloyd-Smith J.O. et al., ‘Superspreading and the effect of
    individual variation on disease emergence’, Nature, 2005.

  2. Worobey M. et al., ‘1970s and “Patient 0” -1 genomes
    illuminate early / history in North America’, Nature, 2016.

  3. Cumming J.G., ‘An epidemic resulting from the contamination of
    ice cream by a typhoid carrier’, Journal of the American Medical
    Association, 1917.

  4. Bollobas B., ‘To Prove and Conjecture: Paul Erdős and His
    Mathematics’, American Mathematical Monthly, 1998.

  5. Potterat J.J., et al., ‘Sexual network structure as an indicator of
    epidemic phase’, Sexually Transmitted Infections, 2002.

  6. Watts D.J. and Strogatz S.H., ‘Collective dynamics of “small-
    world” networks’, Nature, 1998.

  7. Barabási A.L. and Albert R., ‘Emergence of Scaling in Random
    Networks’, Science, 1999. A similar idea had emerged in the
    1970s, when physicist Derek de Solla Price analysed academic
    publications. He’d suggested preferential attachment could
    explain the extreme variation in the number of citations: a paper
    was more likely to be cited if it was already highly cited. Source:
    Price D.D.S., ‘A General Theory of Bibliometric and Other
    Cumulative Advantage Processes’, Journal of the American
    Society for Information Science, 1976.

  8. Liljeros F. et al., ‘The web of human sexual contacts’, Nature,
    2001; de Blasio B. et al., ‘Preferential attachment in sexual
    networks’, PNAS, 2007.

  9. Yorke J.A. et al., ‘Dynamics and control of the transmission of
    gonorrhea’, Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 1978.

  10. May R.M. and Anderson R.M., ‘The Transmission Dynamics of
    Human Immunodeficiency Virus ()’, Philosophical
    Transactions of the Royal Society B, 1988.

Free download pdf