3 ms·
Oh, sorry. I was implicitly making the following assumptions: (0) Reactions can be quantified - assigned numerical values, roughly corresponding to our intuiti
by catnaroek 10y ago
Oh, sorry. I was implicitly making the following assumptions:
(0) Reactions can be quantified - assigned numerical values, roughly corresponding to our intuition of a “positive”, “neutral” or “negative” reaction.
(1) The possible reactions can be meaningfully averaged, and the result can be interpreted as a reaction value as well.
So by “expectation”, I meant “expected value”, in the usual sense. If your objection is that “expectation” can't be used as this, I have evidence that suggests otherwise:
(0) http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-05-introduction-to-probability-and-statistics-spring-2014/readings/MIT18_05S14_Reading6a.pdf http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-05-introduction-to...
(1) https://www3.nd.edu/~rwilliam/stats1/x12.pdf https://www3.nd.edu/~rwilliam/stats1/x12.pdf
- tome 10y agoIt's rather non-standard to say "I expected" in this sense but since you've gone to the trouble to define your terminology and back up your claim, fair enough!
- qwertyuiop924 10y agoYeah, to clarify, my initial gripe was that he didn't clarify his terminology to begin with. His definition is correct, it's just uncommon, and confusing as a result. He really should have clarified this in the head comment.