lukeprog comments on Statistical Prediction Rules Out-Perform Expert Human Judgments - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (195)
Dang. Fixed.
Wow. I highly recommend reading the Dawes pdf, it's illuminating:
He then goes on to show that improper linear models still beat human judgment. If your reaction to the top-level post wasn't endorsement of statistical methods for these problems, this pdf is a bunch more evidence that you can use to update your beliefs about statistical methods of prediction.
That is a beautiful summary sentence, incidentally, and I am taking it with me as a shorthand "handle" for this whole idea.
I find it works well as a surface-level counter for the (alas, still inappropriately compelling) idea that a dumb algorithm can't get more accurate results than a smart observer.
Another possible metaphor is the pocket calculator.
It can find a number for any expression you can put into it, and in most cases it can do it way faster and more accurately than a human could. However, that doesn't make it a replacement for a human. An intelligent agent like a human is still needed for the crucial part of figuring out what expression would be meaningful to put into it.
That is a very helpful metaphor for wrapping my head around both the advantages and limitations of SPR, thank you! :)