The Future Has Thicker Tails than the Past: Model Error as Branching Counterfactuals
| Abstract | Ex ante predicted outcomes should be interpreted as counterfactuals (potential histories), with errors as the spread between outcomes. But error rates have error rates. We reapply measurements of uncertainty about the estimation errors of the estimation errors of an estimation treated as branching counterfactuals. Such recursions of epistemic uncertainty have markedly different distributial properties from conventional sampling error, and lead to fatter tails in the projections than in past realizations. Counterfactuals of error rates always lead to fat tails, regardless of the probability distribution used. A mere .01% branching error rate about the STD (itself an error rate), and .01% branching error rate about that error rate, etc. (recursing all the way) results in explosive (and infinite) moments higher than 1. Missing any degree of regress leads to the underestimation of small probabilities and concave payoffs (a standard example of which is Fukushima). The paper states the conditions under which higher order rates of uncertainty (expressed in spreads of counterfactuals) alters the shapes the of final distribution and shows which a priori beliefs about conterfactuals are needed to accept the reliability of conventional probabilistic methods (thin tails or mildly fat tails). | |||||||||
| Keywords | Regressing errors Fukushima Metaprobability | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,865 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesDeborah G. Mayo (1997). Error Statistics and Learning From Error: Making a Virtue of Necessity. Philosophy of Science 64 (4):212.
Stephen Finlay (2011). Errors Upon Errors: A Reply to Joyce. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (3):535-547.
Guy Hawkins, Scott D. Brown, Mark Steyvers & Eric-Jan Wagenmakers (2012). Context Effects in Multi-Alternative Decision Making: Empirical Data and a Bayesian Model. Cognitive Science 36 (3):498-516.
Thomas Muller (2007). A Branching Space-Times View on Quantum Error Correction. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 38 (3):635-652.
Douglas Allchin (2001). Error Types. Perspectives on Science 9 (1):38-58.
George A. Peters (2006). Human Error: Causes and Control. Crc/Taylor & Francis.
Richard Joyce (2011). The Error In 'The Error In The Error Theory'. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (3):519-534.
Barry Sopher & Gary Gigliotti (1993). Intransitive Cycles: Rational Choice or Random Error? An Answer Based on Estimation of Error Rates with Experimental Data. Theory and Decision 35 (3):311-336.
Chris Daly & David Liggins (2010). In Defence of Error Theory. Philosophical Studies 149 (2):209-230.
Altug Yalcintas (2011). On Error: Undisciplined Thoughts on One of the Causes of Intellectual Path Dependency. Ankara University SBF Review 66 (2):215-233.
Ulfert Gronewold, Anna Gold & Steven E. Salterio (forthcoming). Reporting Self-Made Errors: The Impact of Organizational Error-Management Climate and Error Type. Journal of Business Ethics.
Mohan Matthen & Edwin Levy (1984). Teleology, Error, and the Human Immune System. Journal of Philosophy 81 (7):351-372.
Jutta Schickore (2002). (Ab)Using the Past for Present Purposes: Exposing Contextual and Trans-Contextual Features of Error. Perspectives on Science 10 (4):433-456.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2011-07-02Total downloads35 ( #34,738 of 556,772 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,754 of 556,772 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
