05-04-2020, 09:40 PM
(05-04-2020, 09:05 PM)Goose Wrote:(05-04-2020, 04:33 PM)burger Wrote: This is a better model than the original in many ways, but I don't think these predictions are going to hold up. Too many questionable assumptions.
Then why is it a "better" model? Do you think its predictions are going to be closer i.e. smaller "error" in an RMS sense or absolute error sense?
It's a process model. They're using real data to estimate the parameters for the effects of social distancing. This has the potential to be useful in limited circumstances where the social distancing measures are static.
The problem is that things constantly changing, so the model will always be playing catch-up, so to speak. That makes the predictions likely to be inaccurate. But I'll still take this over the earlier version which was mostly disconnected from reality.
