|
|
|
|
|
by jmilloy
4155 days ago
|
|
I wrote this below, but several things are clear here: - This isn't a quote and should be taken with a grain of salt. Oversimplification, poor wording, and basic misunderstanding on the part of the author are at fault. - We don't know what the models outputs are. If they are simply SUCCEED / FAIL, then yes, 50% correct is not very helpful (unless of course it is right more than 50% of the time on big winners). If the outputs are more granular (likelihood of success, expected ROI, etc), then being "right" means a lot less and, to the extent that it does mean something, being right 50% of the time is much more helpful. Imagine being right 50% of the time guessing about getting through airport security. If you're guesses are "WILL" or "WON'T", then 50% is terrible. If you're guesses are like "through in 23 min 53 sec" then 50% is incredible. If you're guesses are like "70% of being through in 15-20 minutes", what does "right" mean? |
|