Pretty sure we decided that they fit a cubic to log(deaths), not to deaths. So log(deaths) goes to negative infinity as deaths goes to zero.
-
-
Also, I'm annoyed that I wrote deaths and not log(deaths) in the original tweet and there's no good way to amend this without deleting the entire set of tweets and re-writing them (which I might do, IDK), perhttps://twitter.com/anjakefala/status/1254479204810403841 …
-
I'm actually envious of communities that carry out discussions on FB instead of Twitter since the tools FB provides are so much better. I think it's a pretty bad sign when you long for a Facebook level of support for nuanced discussions, but here we are.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
This is why I'm a big believer, philosophically, in fundamentals-based models rather than curve-fitting. A quadratic is a good model _if_ you have reason to believe that your data should fit a quadratic well!
-
You can also improve things with cross-validation; if the May 5 cubic model still looked good when fit against the May 15 data, that would be evidence in its favor. But without either a fundamentals model or good cross-validation, your fitted curve is probably bullshit.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.