Timeline for What is wrong with extrapolation?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 12, 2020 at 21:19 | history | edited | Laurent Duval | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
updated references, added details
|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:44 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://stats.stackexchange.com/ with https://stats.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Jun 27, 2016 at 19:11 | history | edited | Laurent Duval | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added a "funny cartoon"
|
| Jun 21, 2016 at 20:21 | history | edited | Laurent Duval | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
changed terms
|
| Jun 20, 2016 at 19:54 | comment | added | whuber♦ | Certainly the question uses both words: the entire point is whether "forecasting" has to be considered a form of "extrapolation." According to your introductory comments, you seem to define extrapolation as using the past to "model the future." Until you offer clear and distinct definitions of each, your answer could be misunderstood. | |
| Jun 20, 2016 at 19:11 | comment | added | Laurent Duval | @whuber forecasting and extrapolation are used in the question. I indeed used predictions. I restricted here extrapolation as "prediction out of the range". Wrong? Suggestions? | |
| Jun 20, 2016 at 18:27 | comment | added | whuber♦ | This answer appears to equate extrapolation with prediction--but the two are not necessarily the same. In fact, incorrectly equating the two concepts may be the source of the paradox expressed in the question. | |
| Jun 20, 2016 at 8:01 | history | edited | Laurent Duval | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added the Anscombe dataset again
|
| Jun 19, 2016 at 20:59 | history | edited | Laurent Duval | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 28 characters in body
|
| Jun 19, 2016 at 20:59 | comment | added | Laurent Duval | Very hard to model past quote legends as well. | |
| Jun 19, 2016 at 20:35 | comment | added | usεr11852 | I never said the ever part. I made this comment because given that the saying seems much more likely to be a Danish proverb, attributing it to a particular (extremely emblematic) Dane seems a bit of over-billing - especially given that there are no records of Bohr saying it. The original author might be an unnamed fisherman commenting on tomorrow's catch! I am rooting for the little guy here! :D | |
| Jun 19, 2016 at 20:21 | comment | added | Laurent Duval | @usεr11852 Unlikely he "ever said that"? That why I said "attributed", should I be more cautious? | |
| Jun 19, 2016 at 20:12 | comment | added | usεr11852 | +1 Nice answer. According to this website it seems unlikely that Bohr said it. It seems more likely to be an uncommon but generic Danish proverb. | |
| Jun 19, 2016 at 15:15 | history | edited | Laurent Duval | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added details, clarified exposition
|
| Jun 19, 2016 at 10:04 | history | answered | Laurent Duval | CC BY-SA 3.0 |