tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post2123935610087947046..comments2024-07-14T17:05:42.915-05:00Comments on Computational Complexity: How to tell how good a TV show isLance Fortnowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06752030912874378610noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-77647969210283012612010-01-01T10:53:32.119-06:002010-01-01T10:53:32.119-06:00(Coming back to choosing a TV show) To add to the ...(Coming back to choosing a TV show) To add to the analysis, one non-quantitative factor I think of is how badly I want to watch an episode even if someone gave me a jist of what's going to happen therein. <br /><br />So, conditional probability could be used to make the following a good measure of how good the TV show is:<br />Pr[Watch the show|Story] (Pr. that I will watch the show given that I know the story). <br /><br />P(story) can be decided by the narrator who tells me as much portion of the story while Pr(watching the show) can be chosen using any of the ways you mentioned.<br /><br />Vineet<br />IndiaVineet Pandeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10361261594208609052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-79029633880679507692009-12-27T12:18:12.554-06:002009-12-27T12:18:12.554-06:00i don't trust wolframalpha's output at all...i don't trust wolframalpha's output at all. particularly after seeing the publication.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-35087831774628662482009-12-27T11:48:27.823-06:002009-12-27T11:48:27.823-06:00I'm not the same anon, but
http://www.wolframa...<i>I'm not the same anon, but<br />http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i={{0%2C1}%2C{1%2C-7}}+*+{{7%2C1}%2C{1%2C0}}<br /><br />shows that W|A thinks that [0,1;1,-7] times its inverse [7,1;1,0] is *not* the identity matrix.</i><br /><br />This is indeed bad UI design... it comes from Mathematica where matrix product is '.' and '*' is the TIMES operator, which is a strange operator that multiplies point by point, so [a, b ; c, d] * [x,y;z,w] is [ax,by; cz, dw]. Not sure why they made such a stupid design choice in mathematica, and why it continues in alpha. Nevertheless, one can't blame NKS for this design choice that goes back to mathematica :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-57409705843234669262009-12-26T20:41:04.800-06:002009-12-26T20:41:04.800-06:00> I look forward to your examples of the unreli...> I look forward to your examples of the unreliability of Alpha, which you would no doubt put on slashdot soon.<br /><br />I'm not the same anon, but<br />http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i={{0%2C1}%2C{1%2C-7}}+*+{{7%2C1}%2C{1%2C0}}<br /><br />shows that W|A thinks that [0,1;1,-7] times its inverse [7,1;1,0] is *not* the identity matrix.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-55163727059710048742009-12-26T20:27:09.524-06:002009-12-26T20:27:09.524-06:00I think the story referenced is
http://science.sla...I think the story referenced is<br />http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/12/23/1817233<br />in which 44 claims (not conjectures!) in Wolfram's book are shown to be wrong.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-3204121171295329462009-12-25T19:00:48.818-06:002009-12-25T19:00:48.818-06:00Looking forward forward to lance's end of year...Looking forward forward to lance's end of year wrap up! And his progress on his book ? Does anyone know why lance decided to write the book ?Peternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-52309400812673131422009-12-25T14:27:21.176-06:002009-12-25T14:27:21.176-06:00If I remember correctly I once saw a slashdotted s...<i> If I remember correctly I once saw a slashdotted story on how flawed work in NKS is. A mathematician disproved like 1000 claims.</i><br />I read it on the internet. It must be true.<br /><br />Seriously dude. Even some near future version of Wolfram Alpha may be smart enough to know that "some of NKS is broken" and "alpha may have some connection to NKS" does not imply much about the reliability of alpha.<br /><br />In fact, I am not sure Wolfram Alpha has anything to do with NKS. It contains an online version of Mathematica, and has reasonably good NLP skills. It has access to several databases that it can look up in a sensible way. It can be useful for certain things (e.g. type in "1,1,2,3,5,..." or "1+1/4+1/9+..." or "integrate .1 to .2 sin x/ x "). At least these parts have exactly zero connection to NKS, as far as I can tell.<br /><br />I look forward to your examples of the unreliability of Alpha, which you would no doubt put on slashdot soon.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-90633797647608054222009-12-24T01:04:03.642-06:002009-12-24T01:04:03.642-06:00WolframAlpha isn't worth even mentioning. It&#...WolframAlpha isn't worth even mentioning. It's a black box that that is flawed as it is based on NKS work. If I remember correctly I once saw a slashdotted story on how flawed work in NKS is. A mathematician disproved like 1000 claims. Now, assume that your output result you obtain via wolfram alpha are as reliable as claims made by nks. <br /><br />no wonder how uncreative Microsoft's BING is, it relies on something as unreliable as Wolfram.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-8937084169993702012009-12-23T17:37:16.654-06:002009-12-23T17:37:16.654-06:00Talking of wolframalpha, wouldn't the bing iph...Talking of wolframalpha, wouldn't the bing iphone app actually suffice?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-17555922553228562022009-12-23T11:19:21.284-06:002009-12-23T11:19:21.284-06:00Lance, I am disappointed by you making hype about ...Lance, I am disappointed by you making hype about wolframalpha. Please stick to open source alternatives. For someone in your position Advertising for a company with a notorious reputation is somewhat of a let down ...lance, don't let us downnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-85351258847969081102009-12-22T13:02:48.536-06:002009-12-22T13:02:48.536-06:00Off topic -- I'd like to say thanks to Bill an...Off topic -- I'd like to say thanks to Bill and Lance, and to all the commenters, for an informative, entertaining year on the blog. Happy holidays to everyone.Aaron Sterlingnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-3631701818047849122009-12-22T12:59:05.990-06:002009-12-22T12:59:05.990-06:00These methods wouldn't work well for shows lik...These methods wouldn't work well for shows like The Wire where individual episodes are subsumed by the overarching narrative. I propose instead that you pick threads that run through all the episodes and evaluate them. e.g.,<br /><br />What is the probability that a randomly chosen character is compelling? You may want to assume you sample according to screen time or importance to the story.<br /><br />What is the probability that a randomly chosen actor will deliver a good performance? Again, you probably want to sample according to screen time.<br /><br />What is the probability that a randomly chosen writer will deliver a good script?<br /><br />What is the probability that story elements brought up in earlier episodes will pay off in later episodes?<br /><br />What is the probability that the story will have a satisfying conclusion?<br /><br />etc. Then you can define value preferences: how much do I value good acting versus a good ending; how much do I value good characters versus a good story; and so on.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-49420509381836106062009-12-22T12:11:12.585-06:002009-12-22T12:11:12.585-06:00I know we do it all the time in theory PCs, but is...I know we do it all the time in theory PCs, but is there any actual meaning to taking averages when given input in the form of human rankings on a scale of 1 to 10? Is there any sense in which this scale is linear? Or should we interpret it purely as an ordering, in which case the only thing that makes sense is the median?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-49113818929445235242009-12-22T11:51:56.307-06:002009-12-22T11:51:56.307-06:00as for the post, fair enough. but everything aside...as for the post, fair enough. but everything aside, interupt lacks an "r". <br />the question now turns into, how do we conclude how good a post is ? Do we take typos into account ?fair enoughnoreply@blogger.com