Santa Fe
Institute
  • Research
    • Themes
    • Projects
    • SFI Press
    • Researchers
    • Publications
    • Library
    • Sponsored Research
    • Fellowships
    • Miller Scholarships
  • News + Events
    • News
    • Newsletters
    • Podcasts
    • SFI in the Media
    • Media Center
    • Events
    • Community
    • Journalism Fellowship
  • Education
    • Programs
    • Projects
    • Alumni
    • Complexity Explorer
    • Education FAQ
    • Postdoctoral Research
    • Education Supporters
  • People
    • Researchers
    • Fractal Faculty
    • Staff
    • Miller Scholars
    • Trustees
    • Governance
    • Resident Artists
    • Research Supporters
  • Applied Complexity
    • Office
    • Applied Projects
    • ACtioN
    • Applied Fellows
    • Studios
    • Applied Events
    • Login
  • Give
    • Give Now
    • Ways to Give
    • Contact
  • About
    • About SFI
    • Engage
    • Complex Systems
    • FAQ
    • Campuses
    • Jobs
    • Contact
    • Library
    • Employee Portal

Science for a Complex World

Events

Here's what's happening

Give

You make SFI possible

Subscribe

Sign up for research news

Connect

Follow us on social media

© 2026 Santa Fe Institute. All rights reserved. This site is supported by the Miller Omega Program.

Home / News

Op-ed: Outbreak forecasts sometimes wrong because they work

December 1, 2014

In Nature, SFI Omidyar Fellow Sam Scarpino is among 24 co-authors offering a rebuttal to recent assertions that epidemiological models used to estimate the trajectory of the Ebola outbreak in West Africa missed the mark.

On November 4, Nature writer Declan Butler wrote: "For the current crisis, on-the-ground data contradict the projections of published models." He then noted several model forecasts that had failed to predict the course of the outbreak.

The editorial prompted lead author Caitlin Rivers and co-authors to write: "We argue that the author misrepresents the purpose of epidemic models, and overlooks the role models play in outbreak response," noting that the modeling forecasts themselves encourage public health interventions, which can change the course of the outbreak.

"As those interventions were implemented and as behaviors changed, case counts that diverged from the modeled baseline were one of the earliest indicators that the adaptive response was having an impact," they write. "Instead of portraying them as having ‘missed the mark’, we encourage a closer inspection of the importance of models beyond providing forecasts.

Read the rebuttal in Nature (November 27, 2014, subscription required)





Share
  • Sign Up For SFI News
News Media Contact

Santa Fe Institute

Office of Communications
news@santafe.edu
505-984-8800



  • Tags
  • Research
  • Events
  • Education
  • Alumni
  • ACtioN


  • Related Projects


More SFI News

View All News

Why noise may be the key to understanding cell group patterns

Reinventing democracy before it breaks

Do deep learning models recognize 3D shapes in the same way humans do?

Upending assumptions about learning, inspired by an AI phenomenon

Looking at AGI through the lens of natural intelligence

A simple baseline for AI forecasting in machine learning

Constantino Tsallis to co-chair the 2027 Nobel Symposium on Statistical Mechanics

How novelty arrives: Review of “The Origins of the New”

Working group asks, what’s the benefit of a brain?

Measuring irreversibility in gene transcription

ACtioN Academy engages industry leaders on AI and complexity

Arguing for a complex adaptive power grid

Mark Newman Awarded 2026 SIAM John von Neumann Prize

Review: Nonesuch, by SFI Miller Scholar Francis Spufford

Laurent Hébert-Dufresne to receive Young Scientist Award

What does it mean to compute?

Reassessing the scientific method

SFI External Professor Santiago Elena elected to the American Academy of Microbiology

From cells to companies: Study shows how diversity scales within complex systems

SFI Press launches “The Economy as an Evolving Complex System IV”