“Why did Google Flu Trends eventually fail? What assumptions did they make about their data or their model that ultimately proved not to be true?“
Wired - What Can We Learn from the Epic Failure of Google Flu Trends?
NYTimes - Google Flu Trends: The Limits of Big Data
Nature - When Google got flu wrong
Time - Google’s Flu Project Shows the Failings of Big Data
Harvard Business Review - Google Flu Trends’ Failure Shows Good Data > Big Data
The first sign of trouble emerged in 2009, shortly after GFT launched, when it completely missed the swine flu pandemic. Last year, Nature reported that Flu Trends overestimated by 50% the peak Christmas season flu of 2012. Last week came the most damning evaluation yet. In Science, a team of Harvard-affiliated researchers published their findings that GFT has over-estimated the prevalence of flu for 100 out of the last 108 weeks; it’s been wrong since August 2011. The Science article further points out that a simplistic forecasting model—a model as basic as one that predicts the temperature by looking at recent-past temperatures—would have forecasted flu better than GFT.
ReplyDelete"...claiming that they could “nowcast” the flu based on people’s searches. The essential idea, published in a paper in Nature, was that when people are sick with the flu, many search for flu-related information on Google, providing almost instant signals of overall flu prevalence."
ReplyDeleteGoogle Flu Trends eventually failed because Google assumed search numbers for symptoms and remedies will spike whenever flu season peaks. Although GFT proved to have correct assumptions for two to three years, flu epidemics are spontaneous and cannot always be predicted.
GFT over estimated the percentages of the influenza giving inaccurate and un-reliable information, this is why it failed.
ReplyDeleteThe trouble for the GFT started in 2009 when it completely missed the swine flu pandemic. Then last year there was a 50% overestimate for thew Christmas season flu of 2012. Last week the Science team of Harvard affiliated researchers published their finds that the GFT again overestimated the prevalence of flu 100 out of the last 108 weeks and it has been wrong since August 2011. The article finally went on to say that a simple forecasting model would have done a better job than the GFT.
ReplyDeleteGoogle flue trends kept over calculating their assumptions of the rates of flues trending by 50 percent to 30 percent at times
ReplyDeleteGoogle Flu trendz eventually failed because GFT over estimated the percentages of the influenza giving inaccurate and un-reliable information, that is why it had failed.
ReplyDelete"And then, GFT failed—and failed spectacularly—missing at the peak of the 2013 flu season by 140 percent. But while Google’s efforts in projecting the flu were well meaning, they were remarkably opaque in terms of method and data—making it dangerous to rely on Google Flu Trends for any decision-making." This means that google flu trends were inaccurate and impossible to rely on. The very thing they created was used against and eventually caused their downfall.
ReplyDeleteGoogle Influenza Patterns was a web benefit worked by Google. It gave assessments of flu action to more than 25 nations. By totaling Google look inquiries, it endeavored to make precise forecasts about influenza movement.However regarded creators and scholastic frequently indicated Google Influenza Inclines as evidence of the triumph of the huge information approach. Following 45 influenza related pursuit terms over billions of inquiries, observing patterns and making connections would win out. Google could tap the "aggregate knowledge" of society progressively, free of the human inclination and speculations of customary techniques.
ReplyDeleteSocial researchers reported that Google’s influenza prediction fiercely overestimated the quantity of flu cases in the United States within the 2012 -13 seasons. Google Flu Trends' gauge for the 2011-12 influenza season was more than 50 percent higher than the cases
ReplyDeleteThe google influenza was fundamental on the Trends site. It gave appraisals of flu action to more than 25 nations. By conglomerating Google seek inquiries, it endeavored to make exact expectations about influenza movement. This venture was initially propelled in 2008 by Google.org to foresee episodes of influenza. Yet, at last it fizzled in light of the fact that it was not ready to anticipate a huge episode like the swing influenza. Most like due to individuals who googled this season's cold virus out of dread made the most of the ascent speedier than planed requiring its down come up short. Likewise later over anticipating base on past disappointment making it not a solid place for thing like disorder but rather on thing that can be anticipated like games or political issues.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"Unfortunately, no. The first sign of trouble emerged in 2009, shortly after GFT launched, when it completely missed the swine flu pandemic. Last year, Nature reported that Flu Trends overestimated by 50% the peak Christmas season flu of 2012. Last week came the most damning evaluation yet. In Science, a team of Harvard-affiliated researchers published their findings that GFT has over-estimated the prevalence of flu for 100 out of the last 108 weeks; it’s been wrong since August 2011. The Science article further points out that a simplistic forecasting model—a model as basic as one that predicts the temperature by looking at recent-past temperatures—would have forecasted flu better than GFT."-Harvard Business Review - Google Flu Trends’ Failure Shows Good Data > Big Data. This means that they over estamated which led to their down fall. The information was unreliable.
ReplyDeleteGoogle flu trends major down fall was its consistent mistake of overestimating the number of flu cases in the U.S. This overshot caused google flu trends to lose its credibility. It also castes a shadow over big data algorithm's. There mistakes were most prevalent in the 2012-13 flu season where their predictions were over 50% higher than the cases reported.
ReplyDeleteArticle read_ Nature - When Google got flu wrong
ReplyDeleteThis article discusses the temporary setback of Google due to the drastic estimation of peak flu levels. The problem arise from the excessive exposure to widespread media coverage, which eventually led to its demise of the tracker. This led to miscalculations.
Google Flu Eventually Failed Because They Made The Wrong Assumptions.
ReplyDeleteGoogle Flu trends over estimated the widespread presence of flu in the years 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 due to using the data of people that have researched the virus, but however not everyone that searched up this topic actually had the virus.
ReplyDelete"And then, GFT failed—and failed spectacularly—missing at the peak of the 2013 flu season by 140 percent. "
ReplyDeleteIt failed because google underestimated the amount of people effected making them inaccurate and unable to rely on for information. They over estimated 100 of the 108 weeks.
they over estimated the wide spread flu in 2013 season by 140 percent and computer only reads related words to whatever it is its looking for and what the google engine doe s is match the query and determine the order of search result which is searches relevant searches and that how the google trend flu works it can be related to flu but not necessarily mean they have the flu
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSpecialists starting with Google investigated this potential, asserting that they Might “now-cast” those influenza In view of people’s searches. The fundamental idea, distributed to An paper in Nature, might have been that At people are debilitated with the flu, a significant number hunt for flu-related majority of the data looking into Google, giving Just about moment signs about Generally speaking influenza predominance. The paper exhibited that hunt data, In appropriately tuned of the influenza following majority of the data starting with the focuses to illness control Also Prevention, Might process exact estimates about influenza predominance two weeks prior over those CDC’s data—turning the advanced deny for people’s searches under possibly life-saving insights. Unfortunately, no. The primary sign about issue risen to 2009, quickly then afterward GFT launched, At it totally missed the swine influenza pandemic. Most recent year, way accounted for that influenza patterns overestimated Toward half those top Christmas season influenza for 2012. A week ago went those practically condemning assessment yet.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the article google flu trends failed because google assumed the information about the flu. The sign of this was founded out when the GFT came about. Google flu trends are not accurate and the information is not credible.
ReplyDelete