observations

How would you quickly tell if a Bayesian network aggregating probabilities from hundreds of observations is correct?

What if NLP is an incorrect synthesis of real-world observations that were already known at the time NLP was developed?

Perhaps the most intuitive way is to imagine many samples (observations) of x, y pairs.

A model that correlates low female participation with high power -- and later, increased participation after a struggle -- predicts both observations.

Unfortunately this is true in almost every institution, in my observations and experience (and this is hardly a novel or controversial statement).

His writing consists of entertaining thought experiments and protracted observations of technical society.

Would love thoughts from the community about whether my observations are on/off target.

You are missing my point - if anything, I am almost a pure-play scientific hypothesis/experiment/observations/results fanatic.

In addition to technical observations, I'd really like to know what people think of the concept.

I pride myself in my ability to see sources of workflow inefficiency, and act on my observations to improve myself and others.

There are so many aspects of Ruby that make it well suited for teaching kids about programming that go WAY, WAY beyond the ridiculous observations you've made.

At the end of the day you were the one sitting in the chair and had to make a judgement call based on your training and observations.

They get odd comments like "you're too slender, you don't look like a normal person", "you're too attractive/well-dressed to be tech" and other odd observations that sound like compliment, but aren't.

It seems like it takes twice as long to get the information across because there are constant "quirky" remarks, weird and anthropomorphisations of computers or code, or "humorous" observations about coders.

From my observations, the 'No true X' Fallacy comes into play when a person identifies himself with his skill...it becomes his identity so much that if he encounteres someone better at "his" skill, he feels his identity threatened.

"Euler's original derivation of the value π2/6 essentially extended observations about finite polynomials and assumed that these same properties hold true for infinite series." Sorry, not very convincing or geometric, and I'm sure someone else can provide a better answer, but that's how I visualize it.

Observations by astronomers like Hubble later showed him that his original formulas were correct (my understanding of the field equations are shallow so I may have mischaracterized this).