2 ms·

The author's AI applied a thin layer of varnish to what is more or less handwaving. I think more people need to take an undergraduate level statistics course; t

by nateb2022 2mo ago

The author's AI applied a thin layer of varnish to what is more or less handwaving. I think more people need to take an undergraduate level statistics course; the conclusions made are completely unsupported by the random trials. Weighing six rocks a hundred times doesn't tell you the average weight of a mountain.

nkhola 2mo ago
Great criticism. I should have examined the numbers and the experimental setup more closely before publishing. The signal is there - repetition does help but the exact quantitative conclusions are erroneous in this post. That aside, I like the way it's put - "Weighing six rocks a hundred times doesn't tell you the average weight of a mountain".
- Eddy_Viscosity2 2mo ago
  No offense nkhola, but even this comment feels entirely like a chatbot response.
  - nkhola 2mo ago
    ROFL, is it because they all say "you're right" or something like that - lol maybe I am influenced by them, I need to really think hard about how I phrase things when I type a response in a hurry. I genuinely wanted to just thank the guy. As an aside, not sure if you are following this thread still, but I reworked the experiment and rewrote the post - this time it is all me :D.
nkhola 2mo ago
First of all, thanks for your criticism again, nateb2022. It woke me up. I tried to run a few more tasks and not make any grand claims this time. Actually there is no golden number of repetitions that I can suggest. In fact, the picture is rather noisy. What does happen is that the median task improves in compliance pretty fast after 2 repetitions. I did a sign test and I rewrote the entire post in place. It also gives you due credit and I borrowed the "Weighing mountains" phrase for a section header. I am incredibly thankful to you for being a careful reader. I am super humbled and would love to connect with you. Perhaps I can count on you for future discussions and posts.

nkhola 2mo ago

Great criticism. I should have examined the numbers and the experimental setup more closely before publishing. The signal is there - repetition does help but the exact quantitative conclusions are erroneous in this post. That aside, I like the way it's put - "Weighing six rocks a hundred times doesn't tell you the average weight of a mountain".

Eddy_Viscosity2 2mo ago
No offense nkhola, but even this comment feels entirely like a chatbot response.
- nkhola 2mo ago
  ROFL, is it because they all say "you're right" or something like that - lol maybe I am influenced by them, I need to really think hard about how I phrase things when I type a response in a hurry. I genuinely wanted to just thank the guy. As an aside, not sure if you are following this thread still, but I reworked the experiment and rewrote the post - this time it is all me :D.

nkhola 2mo ago

First of all, thanks for your criticism again, nateb2022. It woke me up. I tried to run a few more tasks and not make any grand claims this time. Actually there is no golden number of repetitions that I can suggest. In fact, the picture is rather noisy. What does happen is that the median task improves in compliance pretty fast after 2 repetitions. I did a sign test and I rewrote the entire post in place. It also gives you due credit and I borrowed the "Weighing mountains" phrase for a section header. I am incredibly thankful to you for being a careful reader. I am super humbled and would love to connect with you. Perhaps I can count on you for future discussions and posts.