Astral Codex Ten

Share this post
Addendum To "No Evidence" Post
astralcodexten.substack.com

Addendum To "No Evidence" Post

...

Dec 23, 2021
87
84
Share this post
Addendum To "No Evidence" Post
astralcodexten.substack.com

The day after I wrote The Phrase “No Evidence” Is A Red Flag For Bad Science Communication, FT published this article:

Like many uses of “no evidence”, they meant that one particular study of this complicated question had failed to reject the null hypothesis.

Here’s what happened to Metaculus’ prediction tournament when the same study came out:

The consensus prediction dropped from 72% chance that it was less lethal, to 63% chance. But it quickly recovered, and is now up to 80%.

This is an unusually clear example of the difference between classical and Bayesian ways of thinking.

84
Share this post
Addendum To "No Evidence" Post
astralcodexten.substack.com
Share this post
Addendum To "No Evidence" Post
astralcodexten.substack.com

Create your profile

0 subscriptions will be displayed on your profile (edit)

Skip for now

Only paid subscribers can comment on this post

Already a paid subscriber? Sign in

Check your email

For your security, we need to re-authenticate you.

Click the link we sent to , or click here to sign in.

  • New First
  • Chronological
TopNewCommunity

No posts

Ready for more?

© 2022 Scott Alexander
Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice
Publish on Substack Get the app
Substack is the home for great writing