
The IHME coronavirus model keeps being wrong. Why are we still listening to it? - ceejayoz
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/5/2/21241261/coronavirus-modeling-us-deaths-ihme-pandemic
======
taeric
This seems silly. The article acknowledges that no other model gives as many
predictions. Noting that some can predict when the peak is (was? I think it
can only predict the is that we saw the peak already), but ostensibly not how
big the peak will be.

And if you throw in that no model has managed to predict how widespread this
already was in NYC, we're left with a field that loves to snipe at the only
group in the room willing to try and answer questions.

Worse, we still have articles writing the IFR and CFR as if they can be
started as a single number. Checking today's numbers in WA, if you are over
sixty, the CFR is a staggering 20%. An easy guess for why this is hitting NYC
harder could just be that they have more people over sixty than a quarter of
Seattle's entire metro area.

So yes, if there are better models, let's see them. Please. But if we are just
going to complain about the experts being asked to model something we don't
understand, at least try and make it sound less like a witch hunt.

~~~
jobigoud
> a field that loves to snipe at the only group in the room willing to try and
> answer questions

Maybe the others tried and decided not to publish their model because they
couln't make it good enough.

The least worst model doesn't necessarily pass the threshold of usefulness. If
everybody had said a more honest "we don't know, the data is not good enough"
then maybe there would have been more effort into getting better data.

~~~
taeric
If we wait for a model that is good enough, we would still be waiting.

I get your point, but it is notable that even this article acknowledges that
we made some good decisions from this model early on.

------
mchusma
I continuously look for models that are 1) regularly updated with the latest
data and improved forecasts (something like weekly) 2) provide estimates out
30-90 days or do. 3) provide that data at the US state level.

Right now, the IMHE model is the only one that attempts this (imperial,
University of texas, not models all predict like 1 week out last I checked
them).

Please if there are other models for 1-3, would love to incorporate them. But
I honestly think these reasons are why the IMHE is popular. Nobody else seems
to even be trying. If I'm wrong please let me know, as I've genuinely been
looking :)

~~~
matthewdgreen
How about [https://covid19-projections.com/](https://covid19-projections.com/)

~~~
dpau
yes, not only is that site referenced in the article but their about page is
very informative as to how their model differs from IHME:
[https://covid19-projections.com/about/](https://covid19-projections.com/about/)

~~~
mchusma
That site is good. 1) thank you, I do like this model better 2) I re glanced
at the article and the article describes it as a place to see past predictions
of the IMHE, which I think is selling it short 3) I think the generic name is
why this model isn't more widely used. I'm actually serious, they should make
it easier to know this a distinct model. It is hard to tell people to compare
IMHE to Imperial to "Covid Projections"? Ihad been on this website before and
didn't realize this was a model (they could have updated the site since then).

------
mchusma
Note that the IMHE model as of today is dramatically different than the one in
this article, and I think addresses all the articles major concerns.

