Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

+ - Why Standard Deviation Should Be Retired From Scientific Use-> 1

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes "Statistician and author Nassim Taleb has a suggestion for scientific researchers: stop trying to use standard deviations in your work. He says it's misunderstood more often than not and also not the best tool for its purpose. 'It is all due to a historical accident: in 1893, the great Karl Pearson introduced the term "standard deviation" for what had been known as "root mean square error." The confusion started then: people thought it meant mean deviation. The idea stuck: every time a newspaper has attempted to clarify the concept of market "volatility", it defined it verbally as mean deviation yet produced the numerical measure of the (higher) standard deviation. But it is not just journalists who fall for the mistake: I recall seeing official documents from the department of commerce and the Federal Reserve partaking of the conflation, even regulators in statements on market volatility. What is worse, Goldstein and I found that a high number of data scientists (many with PhDs) also get confused in real life.'"
Link to Original Source
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Why Standard Deviation Should Be Retired From Scientific Use

Comments Filter:
  • The link didn't load for me, but in general, "because people use it incorrectly" isn't a good reason to stop using something that is useful when used correctly.

"Don't discount flying pigs before you have good air defense." -- jvh@clinet.FI

Working...