Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Barbara Keating's avatar

Thank you for your writings. You have a real skill in conveying complex information so that it is accessible and interesting to a lay audience.

Snailboat's avatar

I’m curious what you think about this- how does define whether the information is “meaningless” and therefore the pattern is not in reality, but only in perception? With the drawing and bunny cloud, it’s pretty obvious, but in large data sets, it’s often difficult to tell if it’s a pattern or random chance, especially if we don’t have all the context (and in biological systems, we often don’t).

For example, if I gave you a set of binary answers (0/1) and you saw a pattern of 0,1,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1, you would rightfully notice a pattern and suspect that 0 is “weighted” or “favored”. But then if I told you they were coin flips, and that it was random chance, then your assumption has to be thrown out. Statistics are supposed to tell us whether something is chance or a “real” pattern, but without all the information of reality, it’s often merely an educated guess.

4 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?