Predictions Derby

About

February 2015
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28

OUR LINKS

YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

Predictions Derby – 22feb15

22 February 2015

George Rebane

Evolution chases environment.

The last go around was Predictions Derby – 12feb15.

Chris Christie – Opens his PAC to raise funds for potential candidacy. L =3, meaning that the probability he would do this now for a future announcement of candidacy is three times as high as the probability he would do it and then decide not to run. This raises his prob of running from 0.500 to 0.750.

Jeb Bush – announces that Paul Wolfowitz, James Baker, and Tom Ridge will become his foreign policy advisory team, given that he’s a bit weak in that area, and that they would agree to have throw in with him in this capacity implies that the likelihood of this evidence supporting a future announcement to run is L = 5. This raises his prob of running from 0.948 to 0.989.

Hillary Clinton – has had some bad press about the contributions to the Clinton Family Foundation from foreign donors that everyone except her and some diehard progressives consider as a conflict of interest (aka corruption). After denials, the Foundation has announced a new policy for accepting donations that is supposed to solve this problem. This just adds to the list of demerits that will impugn her candidacy should she announce. This evidence weighs against her candidacy, and I give it the likelihood of L = 0.9 that reduces her probability of running from 0.808 to 0.791.

Posted in Critical Thinking & Numeracy, Current Affairs, Our Country

11 responses to “Predictions Derby – 22feb15”

Bill Tozer

22 February 2015

On the Democrat side, former President Bill Clinton just threw his support behind Joe Biden.
https://www.facebook.com/PatriotPost/photos/a.82108390913.80726.51560645913/10152819516495914/?type=1&theater

LikeLike
Russ Steele

22 February 2015

In a paper titled Algorithm Aversion the authors write:
Research shows that evidence-based algorithms more accurately predict the future than do human forecasters. Yet, when forecasters are deciding whether to use a human forecaster or a statistical algorithm, they often choose the human forecaster. This phenomenon, which we call algorithm aversion, is costly, and it is important to understand its causes. We show that people are especially averse to algorithmic forecasters after seeing them perform, even when they see them outperform a human forecaster. This is because people more quickly lose confidence in algorithmic than human forecasters after seeing them make the same mistake. In five studies, participants either saw an algorithm make forecasts, a human make forecasts, both, or neither. They then decided whether to tie their incentives to the future predictions of the algorithm or the human. Participants who saw the algorithm perform were less confident in it, and less likely to choose it over an inferior human forecaster. This was true even among those who saw the algorithm outperform the human.
It will be interesting to see how readers treat George’s analysis, which uses an algorithm to calculate the probability of an event, based on human input, with adjustments being made as more precise information becomes available. Humans and algorithms working together to produce a better answer to a complex question.
– See more at: http://marginalrevolution.com/#sthash.iktqv9xQ.dpuf

LikeLike
George Rebane

22 February 2015

RussS 727am – And then there are the prediction algos used surreptitiously by humans. The algo does the predicting – unaided, or aided as here – and the human delivers the prediction without mentioning what he did in the back room.
Today, as you point out, the best predictors are still the cooperative ones. For example, in this Prediction Derby the iterative method of applying Bayes rule allows us to focus independently on each peace of evidence with the confidence that all previous evidence has already been properly encoded in the prior probability which we now combine with the new evidence considered only on its merits.
Sure wish some of the other readers start bringing up new evidence and assigned likelihoods, because it’s certain I’m not covering the whole waterfront with these candidates.

LikeLike
Brad C.

22 February 2015

I don’t know if this has been factored in but I think there has to be a weight given to the idea of “it’s their turn”. Both Clinton and Bush would benefit from this.
Then again, there might be a “burn out” factor associated with candidates like Bush and Clinton family members who keep popping up during election cycles like praire dogs.
Maybe the two factors cancel each other out.

LikeLike
George Rebane

22 February 2015

BradC 1101am – You have a point there. It can be argued that Clinton and Bush have a wind at their back in wanting to make a ‘clean sweep’ for their dynasty. How much more likely do feel that such a sentiment is for each? Note, they don’t have to be the same for both.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

22 February 2015

Warren will be the democrat winner. Clinton has taken too much foreign money.

LikeLike
Walt

22 February 2015

Yes Todd, Clinton has explaining to do. More info here.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/02/22/meet-hillarys-welfare-queens/
The Clinton foundation took in plenty of questionable moneys while she was Sec. of State.
( Pay to play?)
As for Warren, it’s wild that people would vote for a proven liar. Is that just a LIB thing?
Seems “my guy” Walker is holding well. LIBS are going after his dropping out of collage,, but I say,, BIG DEAL.. Look what academia has got us. ( That’s all “O” and Co. is.)
OK,, so their book smart,,but practical stupid. The currant admin is in it for the power and perks, and don’t give a rat’s ass about the real state of the country.

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

22 February 2015

Mr. Walt, Warren could win the Dem Primary if she runs. But a national election? Just like Congresswoman Dildo Debbie down in Florida. She can win the Dem primaries in Florida, but can she keep her job? I bet Carly runs for something in 2016.

LikeLike
Walt

22 February 2015

Bill ol’ buddy, It may be a cold day in Hell before a LIB ever gets elected as President again. Obummer has seen to that. He makes Carter look like a statesman.
There is a good story out on Walker, and how the people of the state are better off since he cut the balls off the unions. Yup,, the unions are singing the blues in soprano.
Even the ones still in the unions are removing their “pro union” bumper stickers.
The shoe is on the other foot. It’s the union goons that are getting terrorized this time.
( Payback’s a bitch)
It will be fun to see how Ca. working Lefties vote, since that great Obamacare is really biting them in the ass. The cost as we all know has gone WAY up.. Not down as promised.
The only ones cheering for it are the underclass who don’t pay jack.

LikeLike
Don Bessee

24 February 2015

Given CA’s massive influence in money todays Senator and Gov 2016 election issues are complicating things for the dems. So we have LA’s Villagrosa saying no to sen, which is a yes to gov, bummer gavin. There are other potential dems and r (run condi run) that are going to help splinter the state. Those candidates are all over the place on potential dem prez candidates. What think you gentlemen?

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

01 March 2015

Who will be the first to throw therir hat into the ring? The primaries are a year and some change away. We all expect Hillary to jump in. Oppps, Barry Sanders has thrown his hat in the ring, me bad. Will Hillary move to the left or move to the middle before the primaries. Or, will she ooze into a nice warm purple?
http://www.vox.com/2015/2/27/8117611/hillary-clinton-bipartisanship
Well, at least she is trying to find the right words. Maybe purple is the new catchphrase for Loser.

LikeLike