7 ms·
As a completely off-topic side note: Since I was introduced to statistics, I always forgot which error was type 1 and which was type 2. I had to read your link
by mduerksen 14y ago
As a completely off-topic side note: Since I was introduced to statistics, I always forgot which error was type 1 and which was type 2. I had to read your link to find out.
In code, "int errorType = 1;" would be a badly chosen variable :)
The expressions "false positive" and "false negative" reveal more semantics than "type 1" and "type 2", and are therefore much easier to remember.
- confluence 14y agoYou are correct, my apologies for explaining with improper terms - that's the curse of knowledge I suppose. I quickly forget that the "map" in my brain is about 10 times more detailed than the vector representation I detail in my answer - and it often lacks ideas that may be critical to understanding. I will use false positive/negative terminology from now on - apologies for the dense language and propagating difficult to comprehend terms - I'll try to stop doing that :D.
- sesqu 14y agoWhile I do agree that false positive and false negative are better names, they do have one shortcoming in comparison: Classical statistics suffers from the inference problem, where instead of "tested positive for presence" you have to say "tested negative for absence". So a type I error is a false negative as much as it is false positive, which can get confusing.