PhilGoetz comments on Amanda Knox: post mortem - Less Wrong

23 Post author: gwern 20 October 2011 04:10PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (483)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: PhilGoetz 21 October 2011 10:25:16PM *  1 point [-]

Neat! It appears the shared version is writable. How can I make a copy of a Google doc, so I can mess around with it myself? I entered this into OpenOffice, and it also gave me a slope of -.02, an intercept of .4, and an R-squared of .02. Weird that the R-squared is so low, since 8 people with log(karma) < .7 gave p > .5, and no people with log(karma) > .7 did.

Also, Eliezer gave p=.15, and that doesn't appear on the graph.

Comment author: komponisto 22 October 2011 12:36:08PM 6 points [-]

Also, Eliezer gave p=.15, and that doesn't appear on the graph.

No he didn't.

Comment author: Jack 24 October 2011 06:05:17AM 2 points [-]

Left Eliezer off since we don't have a firm probability for him and his karma is a huge outlier.

Comment author: Jack 21 October 2011 11:12:59PM 1 point [-]

There is a copy option under the file tab. You're welcome to add to mine though.

Weird that the R-squared is so low, since 8 people with log(karma) < .7 gave p > .5, and no people with log(karma) > .7 did.

For users with Ln(karma) > 7 no answer was > 0.5. But within that range people were about as attracted to 0.5 as they were to 0.01. For further investigation I'd want like to see residuals and the log10 of the prediction.