Jump to content
Science Forums

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
post-92747-0-23309300-1524847190_thumb.png

 

See the graphic.

 

In this case, the algorithm related the topic to hair-dressing, which was inappropriate to say the least.

 

I would have correlated this to "politics" based on the keywords.

 

Assigning weightages under three major categories -

 

Politics

 

* nation - +1

* state - +1

* war - +1

* sociological - + 0.5 (subject category is ambiguous)

 

Hair-dressing

 

* (Cross)-hairs - +1

* sociological - + 0.5

 

Religion

 

* Cross(-hairs) - +1

* sociological - + 0.5

 

You get a relative score of 3.5 / 1.5 / 1.5, which identifies the decider clearly - POLITICS

 

How the guys at Quora arrived at their selection of title is rather obscure ?!

 

Hmmm ........  :sherlock:      

 

Am I thinking straight here:out: 

Edited by petrushkagoogol
Posted

Yes, you're thinking straight in that the algorithm failed, but since it failed when compared to your algorithm, it is clear that your algorithm isn't a good descriptor of theirs.

 

My algorithm is my evaluation as to how the algorithm should have been designed  :vava:

  • 5 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...