by Summary:
Look like same thing as Reinhart/Rogoff Excel error....Darwin makes an appearance with these people ofc right on cue: The Imperial team’s response is that it doesn’t matter: they are “aware of some small non-determinisms”, but “this has historically been considered acceptable because of the general stochastic nature of the model”. Note the phrasing here: Imperial know their code has such bugs, but act as if it’s some inherent randomness of the universe, rather than a result of amateur coding. Apparently, in epidemiology, a difference of 80,000 deaths is “a small non-determinism”. These people are really f_cked up... I feel bad for them... I like this part too: On a personal level, I’d go further and suggest that all academic epidemiology be defunded. This sort of work is best done by
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
Look like same thing as Reinhart/Rogoff Excel error....Darwin makes an appearance with these people ofc right on cue: The Imperial team’s response is that it doesn’t matter: they are “aware of some small non-determinisms”, but “this has historically been considered acceptable because of the general stochastic nature of the model”. Note the phrasing here: Imperial know their code has such bugs, but act as if it’s some inherent randomness of the universe, rather than a result of amateur coding. Apparently, in epidemiology, a difference of 80,000 deaths is “a small non-determinism”. These people are really f_cked up... I feel bad for them... I like this part too: On a personal level, I’d go further and suggest that all academic epidemiology be defunded. This sort of work is best done by
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
Jodi Beggs writes Economists Do It With Models 1970-01-01 00:00:00
Mike Norman writes 24 per cent annual interest on time deposits: St Petersburg Travel Notes, installment three — Gilbert Doctorow
Lars Pålsson Syll writes Daniel Waldenströms rappakalja om ojämlikheten
Merijn T. Knibbe writes ´Fryslan boppe´. An in-depth inspirational analysis of work rewarded with the 2024 Riksbank prize in economic sciences.
Look like same thing as Reinhart/Rogoff Excel error....
Darwin makes an appearance with these people ofc right on cue:
The Imperial team’s response is that it doesn’t matter: they are “aware of some small non-determinisms”, but “this has historically been considered acceptable because of the general stochastic nature of the model”. Note the phrasing here: Imperial know their code has such bugs, but act as if it’s some inherent randomness of the universe, rather than a result of amateur coding. Apparently, in epidemiology, a difference of 80,000 deaths is “a small non-determinism”.
These people are really f_cked up... I feel bad for them... I like this part too:
On a personal level, I’d go further and suggest that all academic epidemiology be defunded. This sort of work is best done by the insurance sector. Insurers employ modellers and data scientists, but also employ managers whose job is to decide whether a model is accurate enough for real world usage and professional software engineers to ensure model software is properly tested, understandable and so on. Academic efforts don’t have these people, and the results speak for themselves.
Everybody who is concerned about the Imperial College model must read this immediately. If true, it is scandalous.https://t.co/Y2SphE228u— David Davis (@DavidDavisMP) May 6, 2020