Nate Silver

@NateSilver538 ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated Yes

Last Checked April 27, 2021

Created

Wed Aug 12 18:02:37 +0000 2020

Likes

Retweets

Source

Twitter Web App

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@gelliottmorris They do happen to improve performance in-sample! But in- sample doesn't matter very much when degrees of freedom far exceed the sample size. And there's no magic you can perform to turn in-sample into out-of-sample data, despite a lot of data science BS to the contrary. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Aug. 12, 2020 Hibernated

Preceded By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@gelliottmorris I think you have this backward. 538's models actually have a good, well-calibrated out-of-sample track record since 2008. We're basically the only model being published this year that has any empirical validation at all, since all the other models from 2016 called it quits. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Aug. 12, 2020 Hibernated

Followed By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@gelliottmorris You're still not getting it. Given the nature of election data, you don't want do to too much optimization; that's how you wind up with an overconfident model. I don't really care that much what the model would have said in elections where I already know the answer. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Aug. 12, 2020 Hibernated