Hi Paul,

Your calculation is correct, but the numbers in the example are odd. If 
TWC really only manage to predict snow 10% of the time (90% false negative 
rate), you would be right not to assign much value to their predictions 
(you do assign _some_, hence the seven-fold increase from your prior to 
your posterior, but with prediction performance like that TWC cannot 
possibly think there is really a 70% chance of snow).

Change the 10% true positives to 90%, and your posterior goes up to 82.6% 
- much more believable.

Also, it's important not to think the figure of 70% has any bearing on the 
problem. I appreciate that you put it in as a red herring to challenge the 
students, but be aware that it may also lead to confusion.

Konrad


On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Lehner, Paul E. wrote:

> I was working on a set of instructions to teach simple 
> two-hypothesis/one-evidence Bayesian updating.  I came across a problem that 
> perplexed me.  This can't be a new problem so I'm hoping someone will clear 
> things up for me.
> 
> The problem
> 
> 1.      Question: What is the chance that it will snow next Monday?
> 
> 2.      My prior: 5% (because it typically snows about 5% of the days during 
> the winter)
> 
> 3.      Evidence: The Weather Channel (TWC) says there is a "70% chance of 
> snow" on Monday.
> 
> 4.      TWC forecasts of snow are calibrated.
> 
> My initial answer is to claim that this problem is underspecified.  So I add
> 
> 
> 5.      On winter days that it snows, TWC forecasts "70% chance of snow" 
> about 10% of the time
> 
> 6.      On winter days that it does not snow, TWC forecasts "70% chance of 
> snow" about 1% of the time.
> 
> So now from P(S)=.05; P("70%"|S)=.10; and P("70%"|S)=.01 I apply Bayes rule 
> and deduce my posterior probability to be P(S|"70%") = .3448.
> 
> Now it seems particularly odd that I would conclude there is only a 34% 
> chance of snow when TWC says there is a 70% chance.  TWC knows so much more 
> about weather forecasting than I do.
> 
> What am I doing wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> Paul E. Lehner, Ph.D.
> Consulting Scientist
> The MITRE Corporation
> (703) 983-7968
> pleh...@mitre.org<mailto:pleh...@mitre.org>
> 
_______________________________________________
uai mailing list
uai@ENGR.ORST.EDU
https://secure.engr.oregonstate.edu/mailman/listinfo/uai

Reply via email to