Terrible graphs
 Stephanie
 Dorkwood
 Posts: 1444
 Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:38 pm
 Location: clinging tenaciously to your buttocks
Terrible graphs
This one, via The Conversation, is... something
"I got a flu virus named after me 'cause I kissed a bat on a dare."
 Woodchopper
 Dorkwood
 Posts: 1418
 Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am
Re: Terrible graphs
That must have taken a long time.
 Bird on a Fire
 Stummy Beige
 Posts: 2600
 Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
 Location: with the birds
Re: Terrible graphs
I think that's quite an effective way of showing the looping effect they're talking about in the article, actually. Though it's certainly not very pretty or intuitive.
now I'm falling asleep and she's calling acab
Re: Terrible graphs
It reminds me of a phone conversation with a colleague on my walk last week, when he was wondering what a graph of total cases vs hospital admissions vs deaths would look like.Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Mon Apr 27, 2020 6:13 pmI think that's quite an effective way of showing the looping effect they're talking about in the article, actually. Though it's certainly not very pretty or intuitive.
I don't know if he's actually been plotting that.
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation
Re: Terrible graphs
Wouldn't any measurement with regular fluctuations show the same loops?
It's basically plotting a sine wave against its derivative, a cosine wave, which gives you a circle. And the only reason it is like a sine wave is because it's using rolling averages to smooth out the fluctuations so that they are more wavelike.
It doesn't really tell you anything particularly interesting, except may that there are weekly fluctuations due to weekends.
It's basically plotting a sine wave against its derivative, a cosine wave, which gives you a circle. And the only reason it is like a sine wave is because it's using rolling averages to smooth out the fluctuations so that they are more wavelike.
It doesn't really tell you anything particularly interesting, except may that there are weekly fluctuations due to weekends.
Jaap's Page: https://www.jaapsch.net/
Re: Terrible graphs
That's a very good point.jaap wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 6:44 amWouldn't any measurement with regular fluctuations show the same loops?
It's basically plotting a sine wave against its derivative, a cosine wave, which gives you a circle. And the only reason it is like a sine wave is because it's using rolling averages to smooth out the fluctuations so that they are more wavelike.
It doesn't really tell you anything particularly interesting, except may that there are weekly fluctuations due to weekends.
I had been staring at it and wondering what useful information could be gleaned at a glance from its bold spirals. The answer appears to be almost none. Thanks.

 Snowbonk
 Posts: 388
 Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm
Re: Terrible graphs
It does look cool, though.
 Stephanie
 Dorkwood
 Posts: 1444
 Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:38 pm
 Location: clinging tenaciously to your buttocks
Re: Terrible graphs
Aww, I feel mean now
"I got a flu virus named after me 'cause I kissed a bat on a dare."
Re: Terrible graphs
Don't feel mean  it's a terrible graph and they should be able to show the information in a less confusing manner
"Don't tell me that the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon"

 Clardic Fug
 Posts: 184
 Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:18 am
Re: Terrible graphs
This came from the White House's Council of economic advisers. On Twitter https://twitter.com/WhiteHouseCEA
They say "To better visualize observed data, we also continually update a curvefitting exercise to summarize COVID19's observed trajectory. Particularly with irregular data, curve fitting can improve data visualization. As shown, IHME's mortality curves have matched the data fairly well."
I laughed out loud  did they use 'Add Trend Line' in Excel, and choose a cubic?
The cubic is the one that predicts zero deaths in 9 days time.
And what kind of curve fitting exercise gives the green line from the black one?
Plus, was that graph really drawn by hand using coloured sharpies, or is there a programme that makes your graphs look more user friendly, by making them more crap? I did think of posting this in Pandemic Jokes, but then, it ain't that funny.
They say "To better visualize observed data, we also continually update a curvefitting exercise to summarize COVID19's observed trajectory. Particularly with irregular data, curve fitting can improve data visualization. As shown, IHME's mortality curves have matched the data fairly well."
I laughed out loud  did they use 'Add Trend Line' in Excel, and choose a cubic?
The cubic is the one that predicts zero deaths in 9 days time.
And what kind of curve fitting exercise gives the green line from the black one?
Plus, was that graph really drawn by hand using coloured sharpies, or is there a programme that makes your graphs look more user friendly, by making them more crap? I did think of posting this in Pandemic Jokes, but then, it ain't that funny.
 Attachments

 Covid.png (309.71 KiB) Viewed 1019 times
Re: Terrible graphs
I think we figured out that the "cubic model" was actually a cubic fit to the log of the data.Allo V Psycho wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2020 5:26 pmThis came from the White House's Council of economic advisers. On Twitter https://twitter.com/WhiteHouseCEA
They say "To better visualize observed data, we also continually update a curvefitting exercise to summarize COVID19's observed trajectory. Particularly with irregular data, curve fitting can improve data visualization. As shown, IHME's mortality curves have matched the data fairly well."
I laughed out loud  did they use 'Add Trend Line' in Excel, and choose a cubic?
The cubic is the one that predicts zero deaths in 9 days time.
And what kind of curve fitting exercise gives the green line from the black one?
Plus, was that graph really drawn by hand using coloured sharpies, or is there a programme that makes your graphs look more user friendly, by making them more crap? I did think of posting this in Pandemic Jokes, but then, it ain't that funny.
https://twitter.com/potatoffel/status/1 ... 09792?s=09
No scientific basis or predictive power whatsoever.
It does seem like the IHME predictions are massively sensitive to the data so might well be overfitting as compared to have a decent prior and/or maximizing the entropy.
molto tricky
Re: Terrible graphs
Last time I checked, a cubic goes to +infinity in one direction and infinity in the other. Even if it's cubic in the logarithm, it can't go to zero in both directions. So if this is a cubic at all, the coefficient of the cubic term must be zero, so really it's a quadratic (in the log) which is ... I'm not sure, is it stupider or just equally stupid?
 basementer
 Snowbonk
 Posts: 386
 Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:03 pm
 Location: Aotearoa
Re: Terrible graphs
I read it as the cubic fit range is only the dashed line, and they've projected it (dotted line) using an unspecified different method because they know the cubic itself generates nonsense. Maybe.bolo wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2020 7:52 pmLast time I checked, a cubic goes to +infinity in one direction and infinity in the other. Even if it's cubic in the logarithm, it can't go to zero in both directions. So if this is a cubic at all, the coefficient of the cubic term must be zero, so really it's a quadratic (in the log) which is ... I'm not sure, is it stupider or just equally stupid?
I'll think of something.
Re: Terrible graphs
Well it does look like a Gaussian, which is what you would get if you took the log of the data and fit a quadratic to it (given that the second derivative is negative) and then exponented it back.bolo wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2020 7:52 pmLast time I checked, a cubic goes to +infinity in one direction and infinity in the other. Even if it's cubic in the logarithm, it can't go to zero in both directions. So if this is a cubic at all, the coefficient of the cubic term must be zero, so really it's a quadratic (in the log) which is ... I'm not sure, is it stupider or just equally stupid?
molto tricky
Re: Terrible graphs
Kevin Hansett talked about the cubic model. And we're discussing someone who has form in economics, with an absolutely barking Laffer curve, which I might dig out later.bolo wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2020 7:52 pmLast time I checked, a cubic goes to +infinity in one direction and infinity in the other. Even if it's cubic in the logarithm, it can't go to zero in both directions. So if this is a cubic at all, the coefficient of the cubic term must be zero, so really it's a quadratic (in the log) which is ... I'm not sure, is it stupider or just equally stupid?
[ETA: https://www.discovermagazine.com/thesc ... ttingever ]
And it only needs to have a turning point at the future zero for a dishonest/incompetent person to then take that zero gradient as all time future.
I don't know which he fails on, but he's certainly not both capable and honest  given his work I'm going for neither.
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation
 basementer
 Snowbonk
 Posts: 386
 Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:03 pm
 Location: Aotearoa
Re: Terrible graphs
That Laffer curve is a fib of beauty. Following through the discussions that ensued, I found someone asserting that Norway is plotted in the wrong place: he took the total tax revenues including those coming from oil for the y axis, and plotted them against general corporate tax rate on the x axis But oil revenues in particular were at that time taxed at a much higher rate than that, so apparently Norway should be have been way over at about 52% rather than 28%.jimbob wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2020 9:14 pmKevin Hansett talked about the cubic model. And we're discussing someone who has form in economics, with an absolutely barking Laffer curve, which I might dig out later.bolo wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2020 7:52 pmLast time I checked, a cubic goes to +infinity in one direction and infinity in the other. Even if it's cubic in the logarithm, it can't go to zero in both directions. So if this is a cubic at all, the coefficient of the cubic term must be zero, so really it's a quadratic (in the log) which is ... I'm not sure, is it stupider or just equally stupid?
[ETA: https://www.discovermagazine.com/thesc ... ttingever ]
And it only needs to have a turning point at the future zero for a dishonest/incompetent person to then take that zero gradient as all time future.
I don't know which he fails on, but he's certainly not both capable and honest  given his work I'm going for neither.
I'll think of something.

 Clardic Fug
 Posts: 184
 Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:18 am
Re: Terrible graphs
That Twitter link led me to this:shpalman wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2020 5:42 pmI think we figured out that the "cubic model" was actually a cubic fit to the log of the data.Allo V Psycho wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2020 5:26 pmThis came from the White House's Council of economic advisers. On Twitter https://twitter.com/WhiteHouseCEA
They say "To better visualize observed data, we also continually update a curvefitting exercise to summarize COVID19's observed trajectory. Particularly with irregular data, curve fitting can improve data visualization. As shown, IHME's mortality curves have matched the data fairly well."
I laughed out loud  did they use 'Add Trend Line' in Excel, and choose a cubic?
The cubic is the one that predicts zero deaths in 9 days time.
And what kind of curve fitting exercise gives the green line from the black one?
Plus, was that graph really drawn by hand using coloured sharpies, or is there a programme that makes your graphs look more user friendly, by making them more crap? I did think of posting this in Pandemic Jokes, but then, it ain't that funny.
https://twitter.com/potatoffel/status/1 ... 09792?s=09
No scientific basis or predictive power whatsoever.
It does seem like the IHME predictions are massively sensitive to the data so might well be overfitting as compared to have a decent prior and/or maximizing the entropy.
https://twitter.com/LevyAntoine/status/ ... 3221677057
Countries are best summarized by their corporate income tax schedule description in the OECD tax database, a thread.
You've probably read it, shpallers, but for the others, trust me. It is funnier than you might think.

 Clardic Fug
 Posts: 184
 Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:18 am
Re: Terrible graphs
OK, I plotted their data as best as I could estimate it (in Excel, of course). Yes, I know I'm sad, but I don't start work till 8, so it is my own personal sadness.
Both log and ln give me a curve, but it's platykurtic compared to theirs: Closest I can get is to plot a cubic on the original data then match a gaussian to part of it.
Both log and ln give me a curve, but it's platykurtic compared to theirs: Closest I can get is to plot a cubic on the original data then match a gaussian to part of it.
Re: Terrible graphs
I think you have to pick the end points of the fit and projection carefully.Allo V Psycho wrote: ↑Thu May 07, 2020 7:00 amOK, I plotted their data as best as I could estimate it (in Excel, of course). Yes, I know I'm sad, but I don't start work till 8, so it is my own personal sadness.
Both log and ln give me a curve, but it's platykurtic compared to theirs: Closest I can get is to plot a cubic on the original data then match a gaussian to part of it.
 Rich Scopie
 Stargoon
 Posts: 135
 Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:21 pm
Re: Terrible graphs
It does appear to have been drawn using the graphical equivalent of Comic Sans...Allo V Psycho wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2020 5:26 pmPlus, was that graph really drawn by hand using coloured sharpies, or is there a programme that makes your graphs look more user friendly, by making them more crap? I did think of posting this in Pandemic Jokes, but then, it ain't that funny.
It first was a rumour dismissed as a lie, but then came the evidence none could deny:
a double page spread in the Sunday Express — the Russians are running the DHSS!
a double page spread in the Sunday Express — the Russians are running the DHSS!
Re: Terrible graphs
It would be straightforward to get that in Excel, but you'd need to actually put in effort to get that  by sorting the data in descending order.Holylol wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 7:59 amA new one:
https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/ ... hisgraph/
It would be very difficult to do that accidentally.
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation
 Bird on a Fire
 Stummy Beige
 Posts: 2600
 Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
 Location: with the birds
Re: Terrible graphs
Although, somebody might make a graph, then sort the cells to look at the data, without realising that the graph would be automatically updated to the new order, and then not check it. Excel doesn't always handle dates well either.jimbob wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 5:50 pmIt would be straightforward to get that in Excel, but you'd need to actually put in effort to get that  by sorting the data in descending order.Holylol wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 7:59 amA new one:
https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/ ... hisgraph/
It would be very difficult to do that accidentally.
now I'm falling asleep and she's calling acab
Re: Terrible graphs
Excel handles dates better than that, though. Again, it would require sorting the data into descending order and then plottingBird on a Fire wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 6:25 pmAlthough, somebody might make a graph, then sort the cells to look at the data, without realising that the graph would be automatically updated to the new order, and then not check it. Excel doesn't always handle dates well either.jimbob wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 5:50 pmIt would be straightforward to get that in Excel, but you'd need to actually put in effort to get that  by sorting the data in descending order.Holylol wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 7:59 amA new one:
https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/ ... hisgraph/
It would be very difficult to do that accidentally.
"Don't tell me that the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon"
Re: Terrible graphs
Unless something has recently changed a lot, only one class of charts in Excel is actually an xy plot.
molto tricky