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.

Lumifer comments on What are your contrarian views? - Less Wrong Discussion

10 Post author: Metus 15 September 2014 09:17AM

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

Comments (806)

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

Comment author: Lumifer 24 September 2014 04:39:07PM 1 point [-]

Truncated normal is not the same thing as a plain-vanilla normal. And using it does mean increasing the complexity of the simulation.

Comment author: AABoyles 24 September 2014 05:14:54PM 0 points [-]

Sentence 1: True, fair point. Sentence 2: This isn't obvious to me. Selecting random values from a truncated normal distribution is (slightly) more complex than, say, a uniform distribution over the same range, but it is demonstrably (slightly) less complex than selecting random values from an unbounded normal distribution. Without finite boundaries, you'd need infinite precision arithmetic just to draw a value.

Comment author: Lumifer 24 September 2014 05:53:03PM 0 points [-]

Sentence 2: This isn't obvious to me

The problem is not with value selection, the problem is with model manipulation. The normal distribution is very well-studied, it has a number of appealing properties which make working with it rather convenient, there is a lot of code written to work with it, etc. Replace it with a truncated normal and suddenly a lot of things break.

Comment author: AABoyles 24 September 2014 06:04:56PM 0 points [-]

Oh! I see what you're saying. Definitely can't argue with that.