(no title)
emanuer | 6 years ago
Thank you very much!
One observation I had while playing with the numbers was: The most accurately shaped curves were achieved by adjusting the "seasonal forcing" to values between 0.5 and 0.6 [1]
I extended the time range to one year and lo and behold there was the gigantic hump in all curves.
I hope that testing kits will be amply available within the next few months so that we can emulate the success of VĂ² [2]
[1] I believe best-fitting curves are a miss-representation as many cases are not recorded, this is why I optimized for a shape that counted the "Infectious"consistently above the "confirmed cases" by the factor of 2-4. I am curious to learn how well my assumptions hold up.
[2] https://www.ft.com/content/0dba7ea8-6713-11ea-800d-da70cff6e...
No comments yet.