pseut

71 ms·

691.
by pseut 14y ago
Maybe the heuristic: description of primary data set + "Analyst" might be a good way to come up with more specific job titles.
692.
by pseut 14y ago
Why not "Statistician," "Computational statistician," or "computer engineer/statistician"?
693.
by pseut 14y ago
>"we want someone who can take large amounts of data and do something awesome with it" Yeah, that's kind of the problem; until "awesome" gets defined, it's awfully hard to be specific about what the company needs. But this is why it's
694.
by pseut 14y ago
I think I'm in the minority, but I really hate the term, "data scientist." It seems usually to mean, "senior statistician, but with training and credentials expected of an RA" (to clarify, that isn't meant as a comment on the original arti
695.
by pseut 14y ago
The OP said, "Nate Silver correctly predicted every single state" which is mistaken. His model is not designed to make predictions like "50/50" and "49/50" and he never claims to make those predictions, so I honestly don't know what you me
696.
by pseut 14y ago
> In the coin flip scenario each throw of the biased coins are independent. How one lands does not effect the other. The same is likely not true for how states end-up voting. For sure. If I have a point, it's that there's not enough in
697.
by pseut 14y ago
> But you can't run the same election 10 times. That makes assessment difficult, but is irrelevant for interpretation. If something happens 60% of the time, it happens with the same probability as drawing a red ball from an urn with 6
698.
by pseut 14y ago
Each poll's reported result is also an average.
699.
by pseut 14y ago
I don't think that his writing gets enough credit -- explaining what is happening to generate the predictions is really useful. Pretty much everyone that builds models from the state level polls seems to have made more or less the same pre
700.
by pseut 14y ago
Like I said, I'm happy for him to get credit for nailing it. But I'm pretty sure that conclusion's based on misunderstanding his forecasts. Unless I missed it somewhere, he's never said "VA is going to Obama, IA's going to Obama, NC's goi
701.
by pseut 14y ago
It's not clear whether you mean that link as a rejoinder or as a supporting argument for the parent. My take is that it supports the parent.
702.
by pseut 14y ago
Do any of them equal 1? Saying that >50% probability means that the model picks the state for Obama would be fine as a classification rule, but he's trying to estimate the probabilities, not forecast who will win. The ~20% comes from t
703.
by pseut 14y ago
So, Nate Silver seems to deserve the even higher profile he'll have after this election, but his model is pretty explicitly not predicting the outcomes of any individual states. They're giving estimated probabilities of the various outco
704.
by pseut 14y ago
Later on the list of guidelines: "Don't abuse the text field in the submission form to add commentary to links. The text field is for starting discussions. If you're submitting a link, put it in the url field. If you want to add initial com