= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
BenAlbahari comments on Bayesian Collaborative Filtering - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (23)
Thinking out loud (this could be a terrible idea, "green hat" thinking alert!): I wonder if it would be interesting to be able to tag a quote as "fiction". There's so many insightful quotes that are spoken through the fictional characters of great authors. It seems a shame that such quotes are "illegitimate". Better to perhaps allow the quotes but tag them appropriately so they can be filtered out of prediction analysis. Thoughts?
How would they be attributed? Valentine Michael's opinions are substantially different from Lazarus Long's.
Simple model: a flag on a quote, present if it's a fictional character, with text preceding the quote explaining the source.
Complex model: Each fictional character is on par with an expert/influencer, with an extra field referencing back to the expert/influencer who's the author. E.g. you could look up all the quotes of "Sherlock Holmes" or all the fictional quotes of characters written by Arthur Conan Doyle.
It seems worth trying, if you want to code it up. While it certainly doesn't make much sense to base predictions about others based on quite possibly incoherent groupings of characters, predicting the other way could be interesting.
But it does occur to me that I could just create user account and post them there, though that wouldn't let others add quotes.
I generally include the name of the character along with the rest.
That doesn't always work -- sometimes it's from an impersonal narrator.
Point - "Narrator", perhaps?