Indexed metadata

False precision, surprise and improved uncertainty assessment

Wendy S. Parker, James S. Risbey

Source record

Source: Crossref

Published: Nov 28, 2015

DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2014.0453

Open original source ↗

Source abstract

An uncertainty report describes the extent of an agent’s uncertainty about some matter. We identify two basic requirements for uncertainty reports, which we call faithfulness and completeness . We then discuss two pitfalls of uncertainty assessment that often result in reports that fail to meet these requirements. The first involves adopting a one-size-fits-all approach to the representation of uncertainty, while the second involves failing to take account of the risk of surprises. In connection with the latter, we respond to the objection that it is impossible to account for the risk of genuine surprises. After outlining some steps that both scientists and the bodies who commission uncertainty assessments can take to help avoid these pitfalls, we explain why striving for faithfulness and completeness is important.

Evidence graph

No public relationships recorded yet.

Integrity note: This page is a factual metadata record created by deterministic ingestion. It is not a claim that the work moves a mathematical frontier or has been independently verified.

False precision, surprise and improved uncertainty assessment — Mathematical Frontier Network