> This is daily data. The effectiveness of interventions doesn't change every day.
There's many endeavors in which the effectiveness of interventions can change daily, either with the conscientiousness of application, or in changing conditions that need response. On top of that, there's all kinds of systems where an intervention can introduce an oscillating contribution to the output.
I can't see any reason why viral containment responses wouldn't have potential interventions in any of those categories, and there are several good reasons why it's likely, perhaps chief among them that effectiveness of control in any system relies heavily on good data feedback.
> You're just assigning meaning to random noise.
First and foremost I'm describing distinctions between characteristics that show up in the plots you brought to the discussion. Those distinctions aren't speculation, they're there. Your attribution of them to "random noise" is at best just as much speculation as my attribution to intervention differences is. And considering how smooth some of those exponentials are there is almost certainly something functional rather than noisy going on behind them, whether it's something I've already mentioned related to containment efforts, or something else like differences in how continuity of social contact works in parts of the world represented by noisier graphs.
There's many endeavors in which the effectiveness of interventions can change daily, either with the conscientiousness of application, or in changing conditions that need response. On top of that, there's all kinds of systems where an intervention can introduce an oscillating contribution to the output.
I can't see any reason why viral containment responses wouldn't have potential interventions in any of those categories, and there are several good reasons why it's likely, perhaps chief among them that effectiveness of control in any system relies heavily on good data feedback.
> You're just assigning meaning to random noise.
First and foremost I'm describing distinctions between characteristics that show up in the plots you brought to the discussion. Those distinctions aren't speculation, they're there. Your attribution of them to "random noise" is at best just as much speculation as my attribution to intervention differences is. And considering how smooth some of those exponentials are there is almost certainly something functional rather than noisy going on behind them, whether it's something I've already mentioned related to containment efforts, or something else like differences in how continuity of social contact works in parts of the world represented by noisier graphs.