Re:A machine learning approach to identifying thought marker...
by dx034 on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @06:27AM
(#12899356)
They should use it, but articles often drop that (or similar) numbers. It's easy to get headlines if you report 85% accuracy as it sounds good and is easy to understand. Reporting the proper numbers is harder to understand for people who are not working in the field and you'd quickly discover that the model doesn't actually work.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
There are no comments on this comment yet.