Post by Pamela Post by Pancho Post by Brian Reay Post by Pamela Post by Brian Reay Post by Pamela
Perhaps furloughed workers should be required to gather crops as a
condition of getting 80% state-funded salary. I mean, what else
are they doing?
Some have searched out other work, either paid or volunteering- it
seems the many of those who applied for support roles in the
Nightingale hospitals came from the airline industry for example.
The Nightingales were never used and have now been closed down.
Put on Standby isn't the same as 'closed down'.
Either way, it makes your position look rather silly. Either the
Government measures were far more effective than you claimed or the
Chinese Virus was as deadly as you claimed, and Ferguson's model you
panicked over has a load of dingo's kidneys.
I'm a bit confused by this criticism of Ferguson's model.
The simplest model out there IFR * (1-1/R0) * UK population (herd
Is there an exponent sign missing?
No, basically at the point of herd immunity one infected person infects
one new susceptible person. When the number of susceptible people
matches 1/R0 (The rest 1-1/R0 are immune, i.e. been infected). Thus the
transmission number is R0 * 1/R0 = 1. I'm sure Wiki will explain it
better than me.
It's a simple approximation because the disease doesn't disappear when
herd immunity is reached, there is an inertia, more people get infected.
Also R0 is not a single figure for everyone (which may be hugely
Post by Pamela
The Telegraph has published a comment which says "Neil Ferguson's Imperial
model could be the most devastating software mistake of all time".
I haven't looked into the detailed specifics of what people say is wrong
with Ferguson's program but his result seems more or less right.
His results are more or less right, because he knew more or less what
they should be, from much simpler models. It doesn't really say a lot
about his model, good or bad. Actually, it does say something good, if
he got a cellular automata model to approximately match SIR, it shows
something was being done right. Caveat, I guess it was a cellular
automata model, I've not seen that confirmed.
In many ways his model was irrelevant. Politician's like to big it up to
shift responsibility. A killer model sounds better than "some scientists
The thing that Ferguson's Imperial paper did was present scenarios, this
could have been done largely without the model. He should have checked
scenario results, approximately, by running at least one other
completely different model. I assume he did.
Post by Pamela
The main arguments against him is the messy code although that
doesn't mean it is wrong. Also the program doesn't give the same result
each time it is run although maybe that's to do with journalists'
misunderstanding of Stochastic modelling.
I think it was less a problem with software modelling and more a problem
with a release procedures/ testing/ quality control.
Ferguson passed out a version of his code without checking it properly.
This isn't really surprising. Ferguson's world probably exploded, he
would have had little time to concentrate on the code. Together with
that, everyone was telling him that he was a rock star, hubris kicks in.
Diligent, but boring, checking goes out the window.
Post by Pamela
It's not clear what model Ferguson's critics are saying would have been
better than his as they don't offer an alternative.
That is a key point. Timely delivery is everything with software. It's
no use delivering fully documented, iso validated, code next year when
people want it now.