Skip to main content

Does data speak for itself?

By
Saw this:

https://informedinsport.com/new-blog/special-post-the-illogic-of-being-data-driven

The numbers have no way of speaking for themselves. We speak for them. We imbue them with meaning

— Nate Silver


So, does data have a way to speak for itself, is all interpretation and meaning imbued solely by the people analyzing the data?

The problem with this question is that it misses a level of analysis.

True, meaning is only conferred through humans, outside the system, mapping external systems to the data.  Semiotic definition of meaning holds.

However, since there are multiple potential interpretations we need a step to maximize the Information in the data before communicating its message to the people.

True it requires that people impose a metric, a type of a prior assumption, yet it is not an assumption on interpretation rather an assumption of the field of analysis.  My favorite metric is that coincidence is informational.  Thats it.  Hence two observations that co-occur are related to each other.  The basic assumption is that 'time' is a shared metric across all observations.

Then the data does speak for itself, it communicates a highly informational message.  We still need to hear the message and interpret it to imbue the message with meaning.  However, since the data has spoken well, with high informational content, the message will be clear.

Should I give an example?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

III) Metrics

By
III) Metrics One of these things is not like the other -- but two of these things are distant from a third. I grew up with Brisk Torah, more specifically my father was a Talmid of Rabbi Joseph Soloveichik and dialectic thinking was part and parcel of our discussions.  Two things, two dinim, the rhythm in the flow between two things.  Dialectics not dichotomies.  The idea espoused by the Rambam in his description of Love and Awe, mutually exclusive, we travel between them. Why create duality?  Dialectics or dichotomies provide a powerful tool, but what is it that tool? What is the challenge? I think the Rabbinic language might be נתת דברך לשיעורים, 'your words are given to degrees', the idea being that without clear definitions we are left with vague language, something is more than something else, ok, but how much more? This I think is the reasoning for the first of the twenty one questions I was taught by my father's mother, 'is it bigger than a breadbox?',...
Post a Comment
Read more

0.0 Introduction to advanced concepts in AI and Machine Learning

By
Introduction to advanced concepts in AI and Machine Learning I created a set of short videos and blog posts to introduce some advanced ideas in AI and Machine Learning.  It is easier for me to think about them as I met them, chronologically in my life, but I may revisit the ideas later from a different perspective. I also noticed that one of things I am doing is utilising slightly off-centre tools to describe an idea.  So for example, I employ Kohonen Feature Maps to describe embeddings.  I think I gain a couple of things this way, first it is a different perspective than most people are used to.  In addition, well you will see :-) I recommend first opening the blog entry (as per the links below), then concurrently watching the linked video. Hope you enjoy these as much as I did putting them together, David Here are links: https://data-information-meaning.blogspot.com/2020/12/memorization-learning-and-classification.html https://data-information-meaning.blogspot.com/...
Post a Comment
Read more

1.55 Multi-scale defines learning

By
Multi-scale defines learning https://rumble.com/vcexnm-multi-scale-defines-learning-part-1.html https://rumble.com/vcexxw-multi-scale-defines-learning-part-2.html Why have I been so focused on multi-scale data?  Because learning can only occur when there are multiple scales.  Why is that true, is sounds nonsensical, what is the relationship between the scale of a set of data and learning that data.   I need to better define multi-scale systems. A multi-scale system has at least two levels.  Each level has elements.  Yet the elements on each level are different.  How different?  In what way are they different?  Primarily the descriptive language of the elements is different.  The elements on each level describe different attributes. Since each level creates its own descriptive language, two different levels are not able to communicate directly with each other.   Although that is a negative definition I like it.   The p...
Post a Comment
Read more