home.social

#randomsampling — Public Fediverse posts

Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #randomsampling, aggregated by home.social.

  1. "Random sampling works better than you think: Gemini 1.5 = o1. The secret? Self-verification magically gets easier with scale."

    Thinking for longer (e.g. o1) is only one of many axes of test-time computing. In a new Google paper, the authors instead focus on scaling the search axis.

    By just randomly sampling 200 responses and self-verifying, Gemini 1.5 (an ancient early 2024 model!) beats o1-Preview and approaches o1. This is without finetuning, RL, or ground-truth verifiers.

    "This was surprising: search is bottlenecked by verification, models are notoriously bad at self-verifying (think hallucinations), and self-consistency doesn't scale. The magic is that self-verification naturally becomes easier at scale! You'd expect that picking out a correct solution becomes harder the larger your pool of solutions is, but the opposite is the case!"

    Read more: eric-zhao.com/blog/sampling

    #Sampling #Random #Randomness #Gemini #RandomSampling #Stats #Statistics

  2. @kim_harding

    #Allergies can make #FoodHandlingRegulations a matter of #LifeOrDeath.

    Sad to read of this death.

    I'd like to see more #RandomSampling by #PublicHealth authorities.

    Cafes, restaurants, supermarkets - tests then large fines and #PublicShaming for failure.
    Hell, given the larcenous nature of too many executives, then jail time for CEOs whose companyies repeatedly fail.

  3. @Edent This is how the Statistical Society of Australia (SSA) distributes it's four PhD/Masters Top-up #Scholarships each year (statsoc.org.au/top_ups). The application process is not very onerous and there's some stratification by gender. I think these were introduced when @aidybarnett was SSA President. Full disclosure, I am a happy recipient of one of these scholarships. #StatSocAu #RandomSampling

  4. More on "UNCLASSIFIED": there are 36,520 of those sites right now. (Despite knowing better I keep diving in and classifying more of them.)

    It's not practical to list all of them. But we can randomly sample. And large-sample statistics start to apply at about n=30, so let's just grab 30 of those sites at random using sort -R | head -30:

       1  sfg.io
    1 extroverteddeveloper.com
    2 letmego.com
    1 thestrad.com
    2 bombmagazine.org
    1 domlaut.com
    1 bootstrap.io
    1 jumpdriveair.com
    2 desmos.com
    1 leo32345.com
    1 echopen.org
    1 schd.ws
    1 web3us.com
    7 akkartik.name
    1 bcardarella.com
    1 cancerletter.com
    1 platinumgames.com
    1 industrytap.com
    2 worldoftea.org
    1 motion.ai
    1 vectorly.io
    2 enterprise.google.com
    1 lift-heavy.com
    1 davidpeter.me
    1 panoye.com
    3 thestrategybridge.org
    2 fontsquirrel.com
    1 kettunen.io
    1 moogfoundation.org
    2 elekslabs.com

    That's a few foundations, a few blogs, a corporate site (enterprise.google.com), and something about tea, all with a small number of posts (1--7).

    I'm looking at some slightly larger samples (60--100) here on my own system, and can actually make some comparisons across samples (to see how much variance there is) which can give some more information on tuning what I would expect to find under the "UNCLASSIFIED" sites.

    Which is one way of using #StatisticalMethods to make estimates where direct measurement or assessment is impractical.

    #HackerNewsAnalytics #HackerNews #MediaAnalysis #RandomSampling #Statistics