personal/nunosempere.github.io
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Update Analysis.md

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Nuño Sempere 2018-11-11 17:41:06 +01:00 committed by GitHub
parent 911d9415e1
commit 75620b2452
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23
1 changed files with 6 additions and 1 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

7
rat/EA-predictions/Analysis.md
View File

@ -100,7 +100,12 @@ For the 35 people who took part in the original prediction making, their results
![](https://nunosempere.github.io/rat/EA-predictions/histogram.jpeg)
![](https://nunosempere.github.io/rat/EA-predictions/Brier-scores.jpeg)
The average accuracy is 55.12%, that is, the average participant got 13.22 out of 24 questions right. If it had been reached, a target credence of 80% would imply an average of 19.2 correct answers. In other words, in this limited domain, when these people say 80%, the thing happens 55% of the time. If they bet, they'd be replacing ~1:1 bets with 1:4 bets.
The average accuracy is 55.12%, that is, the average participant got 13.22 out of 24 questions right. If it had been reached, a target credence of 80% would imply an average of 19.2 correct answers. In other words, in this limited domain, when these people say 80%, the thing happens 55% of the time. If they bet, they'd be replacing ~1:1 bets with 1:4 bets.
## Further analysis
Questions for further analysis:
1. Should the two savants who got very near 80% be proud, or should we expect them to exist merely by chance?
2. Are the results an artifact of a small number of questions which were really hard (f.ex. the % of LessWrongers in EA)?
I expect to answer those questions in the near future.