5 ms·
You are only talking about supervised learning. And the bias people are probably talking about is bias in the data, not bias in the "input", as you put it. Se
by gugagore 10y ago
You are only talking about supervised learning.
And the bias people are probably talking about is bias in the data, not bias in the "input", as you put it.
See http://arxiv.org/abs/1607.06520 http://arxiv.org/abs/1607.06520
for a counterexample to your point.
- wyager 10y agoIn that paper it sounds like the algorithm is finding true relationships that the author doesn't like. What's the problem with the algorithm?
- gugagore 10y agoI don't understand what you mean by "the algorithm" or "true relationships". Do you know what I mean? There's truth as in what the data says, and there's truth as in what's underlying before social processes " corrupt " the truth. This paper examines ways to get at the latent truth. Do you think that's a useful endeavor? It's dismissive to say it has anything to do with what the "author likes".
- wyager 10y ago> and there's truth as in what's underlying before social processes " corrupt " the truth. Ah, so you're defining "truth" as "whatever I imagine the world would be like if society worked the way I wished it did". There's another word for that; "fantasy".
- gugagore 10y agoI asked you to define what you mean by "true relationship". And you did not.