@eladar saidThere is bound to be some variation their number for today is 86...and the day is not over.
I guess my numbers and that site's numbers are different.
41,57,49 and 46 are the official last 4 day death counts. They have 20 fewer deaths yesterday.
@Ponderable
That number is not the same as the US only number. It has been high for a while now.
My total yesterday was 324, now 391 so 67 but they were 20 lower yesterday so today may even it out.
New York is the issue. 58 deaths today?
@eladar saidTo borrow a phrase - Case. Case. Cluster. Cluster. BOOM!!!
New York is the issue. 58 deaths today?
New York is about to go boom, and i don't think it will be pretty.
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
@Eladar
I know why they don't present R^2 with the Logistics Regression. It turns out to not be a sensible measure.
https://statisticsbyjim.com/regression/r-squared-invalid-nonlinear-regression/
Standard Error ( what Deepthought is driving at) I believe is the way to go.
https://statisticsbyjim.com/regression/standard-error-regression-vs-r-squared/
@proper-knob saidNew York is a crap hole.
To borrow a phrase - Case. Case. Cluster. Cluster. BOOM!!!
New York is about to go boom, and i don't think it will be pretty.
@joe-shmo saidYeah, depending on what side of the concavity you are on. Combining that situation would be useless.
@Eladar
I know why they don't present R^2 with the Logistics Regression. It turns out to not be a sensible measure.
https://statisticsbyjim.com/regression/r-squared-invalid-nonlinear-regression/
Standard Error ( what Deepthought is driving at) I believe is the way to go.
@proper-knob saidNew York is not the only big city. Yet it is a crap hole. Lots of rats in their subway system.
To borrow a phrase - Case. Case. Cluster. Cluster. BOOM!!!
New York is about to go boom, and i don't think it will be pretty.
Mike Pence just announced that new guidelines are being developed
telling citizens how they can go back to work with masks on after exposure !!!
Safety first Mike.
Also rather than take the opportunity to tell the American people to keep
their distance and observe good hand-washing ... he asked them to pray.
God bless you Mike.
My bother tried to go shopping for some food as we were starting to get a bit short but he had to turn back. That is because when he came to the supermarket the supermarket staff where turning all people back away from the car park because it was already overflowing and there was gigantic queues, with some individuals in those queues coughing and sneezing, outside the supermarket and all the shelves, including for fresh fruit & veg, where being completely emptied.
This makes me think not only how selfish these people are but how stupid they are; they had to come into very close contact to each other to do that and fresh fruit & veg will not keep for long. I was just appalled when I heard what happened; my faith in humanity shaken. Things are getting bad here, not because of the virus but because of people's selfish & stupid response to it.
Fortunately my bother eventually found a small food shop in a remote part of the countryside where he could still shop and do so reasonably safely. He wasn't greedy; he got just enough to get us by for a while. If only everyone was like him.
ANYONE;
Have any of you here observed similar panic shopping insanity in your local area?
I just thought; It might be for the benefit of humanity if all the shops temporarily increased their prices and sufficiently so to put a stop to this panic shopping stupidity and so that people tend to only take what they need.
The only alternative I can think of is the introduction of rationing, just like we had in the war.
@humy saidThe problem with rationing is that it needs to be administered and there really isn't time to set it up. There was about 6 months at the start of the war, known at the time as the phoney war, where Britain geared herself up to being a war economy and did things like print ration books. There really isn't time to set up the systems for that kind of rationing, and it isn't really required.
I just thought; It might be for the benefit of humanity if all the shops temporarily increased their prices and sufficiently so to put a stop to this panic shopping stupidity and so that people tend to only take what they need.
The only alternative I can think of is the introduction of rationing, just like we had in the war.
The Co-op up the road has a two items of each product rule (ludicrously this extends to Rizlas - I normally buy 3 packets at a time), and only one of milk, to mitigate panic buying, which is about all that's needed.
Price increases will hit vulnerable groups really hard, without massively altering the behaviour of anyone outside the bottom 10%.
@joe-shmo saidA couple of observations, let's make the independent variable t for time. Let c --> c' = -c, and b = exp(ct₀), we now have:
I see what you mean about death being the better measure. I agree.
Thanks for the pointing out the Logistics Regression. I have an 89, didn't know it had the function. I used the Data Matrix App with the following data. This was the result: Starting at March 4 as Day 10 for the regression.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
(Day, Deaths)
10 ...[text shortened]... its a nice fit for the data we currently have), but perhaps the measures we are taking are working?
L[t] = a/(1 + exp(-c(t - t₀))) + d.
Let's work this out for some values of t.
L[-∞] = d
L[0] = a/(1 + exp(ct₀)) + d.
L[t₀] = a/2 + d
L[∞] = a + d
Infinitely far in the past we expect the virus not to exist. In other words we expect d = 0. Infinitely far in the future we expect everyone who is going to die of it to have died, so a = total number of deaths, the quantity we're trying to find (a + d if we don't set d to zero). t₀ is the time at which half the deaths that are going to occur have occurred. I feel t = 0 should correspond to the fatality patient zero, the first death. I think we're free to do this. In which case L[0] = 1. This gives us:
a = 1 + exp(ct₀)
With these constraints we're down to 2 independent parameters. Now, suppose it's business as usual and the virus replicates in the population unchecked, based on the various estimates I've seen, infection rate of 80% and IFR of 0.9%, with the US population being 330 million we get 2.276 million fatalities. This gives an estimate for a of 2,276,000 and taking using the above we can estimate ct₀ ~ 14.68.
Now we run into a problem. We're trying to estimate total deaths by looking at the really early part of the curve. I'm imaging huge error bars. Your estimate for a and d gives total deaths of 2,362 which is looking very optimistic at this time.
@DeepThought
I am willing to bet that it will be more accurate than your exponential growth equation after 1000 days.