> " We showed specifically that we can identify 5% to 15% of cases, while preserving extremely low false-positive rates (0.00001 to 0.0001)."
Back several years ago Google Flu Trend also claimed to have 97% accuracy compared to CDC data. But later on it just found to be way off to the real data. Did the author compare their study to the Google Trend.
Also it's not clear how they achieve the conclusion of low FP. Did they randomize their sample pool and run their predictability model several round?