With actual numbers very, very large, this isn’t remotely a concern; the domain of a correct continuous model might be “so long as there are at least 100 positive tests per week” or the like. Once we’re there, we obviously need to treat things more discretely.
It’s just not a sufficient reason for the modelers to make this egregious an optimistic error in setting R as a function of social distancing measures.
those have other drawbacks, like needing far more data than we have to calibrate and build, or needing you to make up inputs
Those are exactly the drawbacks Zvi is pointing to! And they’re not even putting distributions on the parameter values the pulled from their asses!
With actual numbers very, very large, this isn’t remotely a concern; the domain of a correct continuous model might be “so long as there are at least 100 positive tests per week” or the like. Once we’re there, we obviously need to treat things more discretely.
It’s just not a sufficient reason for the modelers to make this egregious an optimistic error in setting R as a function of social distancing measures.
Those are exactly the drawbacks Zvi is pointing to! And they’re not even putting distributions on the parameter values the pulled from their asses!