Difference between revisions of "Automated contact tracing is not a coronavirus panacea (Q4465)"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created claim: date (P100): 11 April 2020) |
(Created claim: official website (P15): https://blog.gds-gov.tech/automated-contact-tracing-is-not-a-coronavirus-panacea-57fb3ce61d98) |
||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Property / quote | |||
+ | An automated algorithm will necessarily generate both false negatives and false positives. A human contact tracer will similarly make mistakes. However, because a human contact tracer would seek to incorporate information beyond just physical proximity, he/she can correct for systematic biases introduced by automated notification system. | ||
Property / quote: An automated algorithm will necessarily generate both false negatives and false positives. A human contact tracer will similarly make mistakes. However, because a human contact tracer would seek to incorporate information beyond just physical proximity, he/she can correct for systematic biases introduced by automated notification system. / rank | |||
+ | Normal rank | ||
Property / official website | |||
+ | |||
Property / official website: https://blog.gds-gov.tech/automated-contact-tracing-is-not-a-coronavirus-panacea-57fb3ce61d98 / rank | |||
+ | Normal rank |
Latest revision as of 17:59, 14 April 2020
blogpost published by Jason Bay, product lead for TraceTogether
Language | Label | Description | Also known as |
---|---|---|---|
English |
Automated contact tracing is not a coronavirus panacea
|
blogpost published by Jason Bay, product lead for TraceTogether
|
Statements
11 April 2020
0 references
An automated algorithm will necessarily generate both false negatives and false positives. A human contact tracer will similarly make mistakes. However, because a human contact tracer would seek to incorporate information beyond just physical proximity, he/she can correct for systematic biases introduced by automated notification system.
0 references