What are you working on?

jsalvatier

This is the fourth bimonthly What Are You Working On? thread. Thanks to atucker for reminding me to make this post. Click here to see previous threads. So here's the question:

What are you working on?

Here are some guidelines:

Focus on projects that you have recently made progress on, not projects that you're thinking about doing but haven't started, those are for a different thread.
Why this project and not others? Mention reasons why you're doing the project and/or why others should contribute to your project (if applicable).
Talk about your goals for the project.
Any kind of project is fair game: personal improvement, research project, art project, whatever.
Link to your work if it's linkable.

This is the fourth bimonthly What Are You Working On? thread. Thanks to atucker for reminding me to make this post. Click here to see previous threads. So here's the question:

What are you working on?

Here are some guidelines:

Focus on projects that you have recently made progress on, not projects that you're thinking about doing but haven't started, those are for a different thread.
Why this project and not others? Mention reasons why you're doing the project and/or why others should contribute to your project (if applicable).
Talk about your goals for the project.
Any kind of project is fair game: personal improvement, research project, art project, whatever.
Link to your work if it's linkable.

(Also, I'm not sure you're interpreting the graphs right. My understanding is that the graphs show that I am substantially underconfident as compared to PB in general.)

Every 10% range should have an actual certainty about midway in the range right? So for example, for the "50%" range a perfect calibration would be 55% (assuming equidistribution over the whole 50-60 range). For PB as a whole, every category is at least 10% off. For PB as a whole we get: 55% compared to an abysmal 37%, 65% compared to 58%, 75% compared to 58%, 85% compared to 70%, 95% compared to 79%. And the real kicker is that the 100% category is wrong one fifth of the time. In contrast, your numbers are 55% going to 41%, 65% going to 51%, 75% going to 60%, 85% going to 86%, and 95% going to 92%. Your 100% goes to 93%. Thus, with the exception of the 60-70 range every one of yours is better calibrated, and your 80-90 and 90-100 ranges are nearly spot on. Am I misinterpreting the graphs?

You know, I thought that I was supposed to have as flat a line as possible, but now I'm not sure. Re-reading the two axis, I guess the ideal graph is not the green line, but a line at a 45 degree angle going from 50%/50% in the middle-left to 100%/100% in the upper-right.

Have I been misreading the graphs this entire time? How embarrassing! I guess these graphs could be clearer, and explicitly graph the 'ideal' line...

11

What are you working on?

11

11

11

What are you working on?

11

11