Thanks for sharing this @kylieainslie (I really like the idea of more open early project sharing as even within instituation/group its not uncommon to be surprised by work that is quite far along. Definitely takes some practice to feel confident to share openly though (at least for me!).
For others there are some connections to this: Addressing Critical Gaps in Generation Time Estimation During Outbreaks - grant application - #5 by samabbott here especially the first work package.
Good comments @sambrand @sbfnk I put some responses below. My general meta point is to reiterate that we are aiming to create a composable MVP here that can then be extended to the many different connected considerations. In particular we want something that is infection GP independent so that can be considered as a plug in at a later date.
Something that I think it would be great to add here is a section on current simplificatons and future potential extensions/enhancements (i.e tracking the comments here etc).
I also have some other work being spec’d out (more on this soon) that connects to this looking at deriving a specilaised distribution for generation times. I think that this could pair up very nicely
Also the model in the new composable world we will soon be living in. I think this is a key point in how I am thinking about it especially as to why it being a MVP is fine good as it means the model can always be enhanced vs having to live with MVP estimates.
This is the assumption and yes I agree we should flag it.
I think this is a feature to add in extension work vs for the MVP as both of those considerations add the need for some kind of infection generating process which should be a composable extension.
I agree we should generalise this to multi-day ranges as model wise it makes no difference.