Nate Silver

@NateSilver538 ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated Yes

Last Checked April 27, 2021

Created

Thu Aug 06 15:39:06 +0000 2020

Likes

Retweets

Source

Twitter Web App

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@mattyglesias Yes, I disagree that there's a difference between "modeling designed to improve forecast accuracy and modeling designed to explore causal theories". I think the best way to test whether causal theories are true is generally through true out-of-sample prediction. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Aug. 6, 2020 Hibernated

Preceded By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Ehh. There's no get-out-of-jail-free pass for designing a p-hacked/overfit model because you say you're not using it for forecasting. Models that don't hold up well in true out-of-sample prediction are usually dubious, and the theories they proffer are often going to be wrong. — PolitiTweet.org

One thing on the polls vs “fundamentals” debate is that modeling designed to improve forecast accuracy and modeling… https://t.co/0AqjBgdIXh

Posted Aug. 6, 2020 Hibernated

Followed By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@mattyglesias If polling-based models considerably outperform fundamentals-based models in true out-of-sample prediction, that would tend to suggest that campaigns are idiosyncratic and that it's hard to develop reliable stylized facts about elections, which does seem like a valuable insight. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Aug. 6, 2020 Hibernated