Models are based on applying justified premises, adding assumptions, and reasoning from there. No line of reasoning would lead you
-
-
Replying to @nickchk
to an estimated machine learning model. It's a different approach to producing conclusions. And it works!
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @nickchk
This is also the case in more everyday settings. Reasoning we do on a day-to-day basis has to deal with a even more limited capacity
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @nickchk
to incorporate all the complex details than a statistical model could.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @nickchk
You are probably familiar with the "heuristics & biases" literature, i.e. behavioral economics. Kahneman, Thaler, Ariely, etc.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @nickchk
The implicit assumption in this literature is that these heuristics are inferior. But this is not always the case!
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @nickchk
Pure computational intractibility can mean that perfect reasoning can underperform heuristics. Sort of like P/NP thing but for thinking.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @nickchk
Gerd Gigerenzer is a great person to read on this topic. Our procedures for thinking and reasoning are the result
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
gobbless gigerenzer
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
i basically view him as the Evolved pokemon form of h r giger
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.