Table 2.

Comparison of policies in terms of controlling the disease and impacts on campus in Fall 2019.

Behavioral scenario	S1: Persistence			S2: Non-res avoidance			S3: Complete avoidance
Policy	RI	LC		RI	LC		RI	LC
Budget	-	Mobility ($95.5\mathrm{\%}$)	Exposure risk (18,800)	-	Mobility ($92.3\mathrm{\%}$)	Exposure risk (16,900)	-	Mobility ($69.2\mathrm{\%}$)	Exposure risk (12,700)
Infection reduction outcomes
Peak infections (%)	25.34 ($\pm$12)	36.92 ($\pm$14)${}^{\ast \ast }$	34.30 ($\pm$13)${}^{\ast \ast }$	35.44 ($\pm$10)	49.33 ($\pm$11)${}^{\ast \ast }$	52.19 ($\pm$10)${}^{\ast \ast }$	61.62 ($\pm$7)	69.34 ($\pm$5)${}^{\ast \ast }$	64.44 ($\pm$6)${}^{\ast \ast }$
Total infections (%)	6.99 ($\pm$5)	10.63 ($\pm$6)${}^{\ast \ast }$	8.19 ($\pm$5)${}^{\ast \ast }$	14.88 ($\pm$4)	13.96 ($\pm$6)${}^{\ast }$	15.67 ($\pm$6)	33.00 ($\pm$5)	33.4 ($\pm$5)	26.94 ($\pm$5)${}^{\ast \ast }$
Internal transmissions (%)	17.13 ($\pm$9)	22.62 ($\pm$11)${}^{\ast \ast }$	21.01 ($\pm$11)${}^{\ast \ast }$	27.58 ($\pm$8)	35.35 ($\pm$12)${}^{\ast \ast }$	39.20 ($\pm$11)${}^{\ast \ast }$	54.00 ($\pm$8)	70.89 ($\pm$7)${}^{\ast \ast }$	60.90 ($\pm$9)${}^{\ast \ast }$
Burdens on campus
Locations affected	$58$	$18$	$19$	$58$	$38$	$50$	$58$	$192$	$124$
Students avoiding (%)	$0$	$0$	$0$	$9.30$	$0.20$	$0.45$	$27.21$	$12.45$	$6.57$
Completely isolated on campus (%)	$5.42$	$8.40$	$8.40$	$5.95$	$5.72$	$5.71$	$7.09$	$5.18$	$5.23$

Within each behavioral scenario, we performed the Kruskal-Wallis H-Test (63) to compare outcomes of LC with RI. We found that LC leads to significantly improved peak infection reduction and internal transmission. In terms of reduction in total infections, the outcomes were comparable in general but varied by specific scenarios. In addition, every policy also exerted some burden on campus, either in terms of locations affected, students avoiding campus or isolation. We observed that LC policies focus on fewer locations (except in S3). Moreover, these policies affected fewer student’s schedules and therefore fewer people avoid campus due to completely remote schedules. Finally, LC does not increase the percentage of people completely isolated on campus ($p$-value: ${}^{\ast }<$0.01, ${}^{\ast \ast }<$0.001).