Computer Modeling Failed During the Ebola Outbreak

the_newsbeagle writes: Last fall, the trajectory of the Ebola outbreak looked downright terrifying: Computational epidemiologists at Virginia Tech predicted 175,000 cases in Liberia by the end of 2014, while the CDC predicted 1.4 million cases in Liberia and Sierra Leone. They were way off. The actual tally as of January 2015: A total of 20,712 cases in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone combined, and in all three countries, the epidemic was dying down. But the modelers argue that this really wasn't a failure, because their predictions served as worst-case scenarios that mobilized international efforts.

Comments

Re:wrong is right

[rtb61]

Computer models when taking into account no action obviously do not match computer models taking into account action. Obviously idiot lead head (lead head being an interesting failure of greedy corporations to forecast the outcome of lead in fuels used in cities) conservatives do not realise this, hardly a surprise. Normal computer modelling practice is to create several models that reflect different scenarios and responses. To look at the models and ignore the different forecasted possible responses and simply to claim incompetent scientists most of the models where wrong, is so totally conservatively lead head mind bogglingly dumb.