You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

jamesf comments on Introducing Familiar, a quantified reasoning assistant (feedback sought!) - Less Wrong Discussion

19 Post author: jamesf 24 July 2013 02:36AM

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

Comments (40)

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

Comment author: jamesf 13 September 2013 02:33:11PM *  1 point [-]

It's an H2 database saved inside /data in your Familiar directory. You can make SQL queries into it with other programs. Exporting to JSON or CSV or something will happen eventually.

Two, technically, I suppose, but I'd probably collect data for a couple of months before I started seriously interpreting correlations involving variables with a resolution of one day. This will be a topic in the more extended documentation.

Comment author: linkhyrule5 13 September 2013 03:46:55PM 0 points [-]

Ah. Well, (correlations enough-sleep true), for example, just gives me "That didn't work" - what am I doing wrong?

Comment author: jamesf 13 September 2013 10:32:41PM 0 points [-]

I'm not sure. If you're comfortable sharing your data, PM me a link to the contents of your /data folder.

Comment author: linkhyrule5 14 September 2013 05:54:36AM *  0 points [-]

I'd rather not, but I reproduced the problem with some sample data here.

It's just six days of "example1-6", and two predicates. example1 is a {0,1,2}, example2-4 are non-negative, example5-6 are boolean; example7 is defined as "example4 on day-1", example8 is defined as "example3 >= 20". I've filled them in so that example8 generally implies example1=2, and example6 implies example1=2, with one exception as noise (with example6 && example8 and example1=1).

Generates the same error.