3 ms·
mikeash was not advocating for a probability higher than 1. Rather, he was advocating for an infinite reward for indicating a probability of 1. We could reframe
by scott_s 10y ago
mikeash was not advocating for a probability higher than 1. Rather, he was advocating for an infinite reward for indicating a probability of 1. We could reframe his suggestion to be, why are the incentives not symmetric? (I think there are good reasons for this, but it's a valid question.)
- Houshalter 10y agoI was just saying that's the way the math works out. It's not an arbitrary decision, it just happens that the natural way to score probabilities allows negative infinity from a single question. You could make an arbitrary scoring metric that does whatever you want. But it wouldn't be principled, or have nice mathematical properties like this.
- Retric 10y agoThe math was chosen arbitrarily so every outcome is also arbitrary.