Type I and Type II Errors: The Inevitable Errors in Optimization Experiments

Re:Type I and Type II Errors: The Inevitable Errors in Optim... by ImaCake on Thursday April 09, 2020 @05:12PM (#22827261)

They mean what they would mean in common english.

Specificity because "how specific is the test? Does it measure the true positives correctly without getting a whole heap of false positives as well?" You might ask someone to be "more specific" about something so they aren't including irrelevant things in their discussion.

Sensitivity because "how sensitive is the test? Does it detect the needle in the haystack you need to find? How many does it miss." In common english you might complain that your car brakes are too sensitive - they are too quick to register the pressure from your foot.

Don't forget these are actually strict mathematical concepts. Hope this helps clarify :)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Type I and Type II Errors: The Inevitable Errors in Optim... by parekhnish on Thursday April 09, 2020 @10:14PM (#22829301)

I think the issue people have with these names is that their English meanings (as you described) make sense when the positive class is not as prevalent as the negative class. If they are equally probable (or worse, if it's the opposite), then the English meanings quickly become out-of-context

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Type I and Type II Errors: The Inevitable Errors in Optim... by ashfromconvert on Tuesday April 14, 2020 @11:20AM (#22867054)

Thank you for your clear explanation, indeed Specificity instead of Type I errors, and Senvisity for Type II errors, make a lot more sense!

[ Parent | on HN ]