TL;DR
I explore the pros and cons of different approaches to estimation. In general I find that:
- interval estimates are stronger than point estimates
- the lognormal distribution is better for modelling unknowns than the normal distribution
- the geometric mean is better than the arithmetic mean for building aggregate estimates
These differences are only significant in situations of high uncertainty, characterised by a high ratio between confidence interval bounds. Otherwise, simpler approaches (point estimates & the arithmetic mean) are fine.
Summary
I am chiefly interested in how we can make better estimates from very limited evidence. Estimation strategies are key to sanity-checks, cost-effectiveness analyses and forecasting.
Speed and accuracy are important considerations when estimating, but so is legibility; we want our work to be... (read 2706 more words →)
Only if you consider artificial people to be fundamentally less valuable than real people. I'm reserving judgement on that until I meet an artificial person.