tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6629955541128823275.post5915637082556281616..comments2024-03-08T01:15:41.672-05:00Comments on Andrew Eckford: The Blog: Nate Silver's odd wagerAndrew Eckfordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07739059406915664466noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6629955541128823275.post-28133671706478332042012-11-06T10:34:10.122-05:002012-11-06T10:34:10.122-05:00That's right ... I don't know enough about...That's right ... I don't know enough about Silver's methodology, but I would hope he takes inter-state correlations into account. Anyway, we'll find out today.Andrew Eckfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07739059406915664466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6629955541128823275.post-71532950289244472942012-11-05T08:17:50.159-05:002012-11-05T08:17:50.159-05:00It occurred tome on re-reading that I was repeatin...It occurred tome on re-reading that I was repeating your thoughts. So what you are saying is that Silver should construct a significance test to decide whether to accept or reject the hypothesis either his methodology or at least the prediction based on his methodology that Obama has rughly an 80% chance of victory. Presumably a statistic based on state by state results generates a better test than a test based on the aggregate, which is what Silver's bet represents. Despite being semi-obsessed about the election, I still don't know Silver's exact method. Is it documented at 538? (I realize this reveals my laziness since i could go to 538 and check.) Still, in the spirit of idle speculation, what I wonder about is whether in his simulation is whether each state is a bernoulli trial, independent of other states, or whehter he has some interstate correlation.Royhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06360673541978885433noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6629955541128823275.post-2984680092381633292012-11-04T21:51:47.421-05:002012-11-04T21:51:47.421-05:00Exactly. Which is why Silver should have found a d...Exactly. Which is why Silver should have found a different way to bet. He's got reams of polling predictions on which he's calling the race; surely he could craft a bet on those predictions that he'd win with probability close to 1 if he's right. (It's not the kind of bet you could describe in a Twitter post, though.)Andrew Eckfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07739059406915664466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6629955541128823275.post-84862767330548382802012-11-03T22:06:00.533-04:002012-11-03T22:06:00.533-04:00The probabilities matter a lot more when you have ...The probabilities matter a lot more when you have repeated trials. One trial every four years isn't much. For the same reason, if it turns that Romney wins, it doesn't mean Silver was wrong.Royhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06360673541978885433noreply@blogger.com