Descartes before the horse? Sunak bulldozes into education debate #Algorithms #StandardDeviation

[GKH]

As neoliberal social scientists recoil in horror from the notion of calculus being forced down the throat of the “woke brigade” it is as well to remember just where standard deviation calculus came from, the statistical study of social demographics… Sunak is simply dancing to another’s tune…so typical of the facilitating Tories and the neoliberal (thus neoliberal social scientists are also unable to offer any informed opposition to his “Brutalist” stance), for it is Standard Deviation and its importance to the study of statistics and the creation of algorithms that pupils should be familiar with before they leave school… so that means by the time they are 16 not 18. Lack of familiarity with these concepts leaves much of the populace open to the worst forms of elitist oppression (to “disappear” the true poverty -of all forms-, present in society is the “supreme violence” imho), and enables false economies* of all kinds.
Standards should be raised but let’s see that beginning with the better teaching of (esp.), maths and language (linguistics), from an early age. It is no use banging square pegs into round holes once the mould has started to set…not giving kids the tools is like not teaching them to talk and/or walk…

*Incl. WiFi tech and particle beam physics.

Nb. I studied Standard Deviation adult ed.

See thread (economics Prof. Sheffield Uni.); “I agree with Sunak. We do have a problem with innumeracy in the UK, most especially when it comes to statistics. It seems that few journalists know, for example, that a big percentage change in a very small number still means that the resulting number is very small.”: https://twitter.com/RichardJMurphy/status/1610551735604416513

P.S Should we have an “education” category?

[KarenEliot]

If education is a form of grooming people to recite the official line, which it is, it seems to me to qualify as a very relevant category, yes.

I really don’t get this STEM Uber Alles bollocks. Ok, engineers and statisticians are indeed necessary but so are musicians and plumbers, film directors and warehousemen. If every second person can work out a standard deviation (as trustworthy as the data that was gathered - not very in many cases) but no one can compose a limerick what is the effing point of it all?

Are school and tertiary education merely aimed at producing docile bodies, cogs for the great machine?

To be continued, let’s hope, in a shiny new Education category @admins

[GKH]

My point is that SD should be considered as “grammar” if you like…a necessary thing to understand…it rules over all our lives now-a-days K but the basics are not difficult to grasp…really other forms of calculus are much more complex… I grasped it in a few weeks having not studied any maths for well over a decade…

“The standard deviation formula may look confusing, but it will make sense after we break it down. …
Step 1: Find the mean.
Step 2: For each data point, find the square of its distance to the mean.
Step 3: Sum the values from Step 2.
Step 4: Divide by the number of data points.
Step 5: Take the square root.”

and that’s “Sigma” or S.D kids now we can go on from that to look at algorithms (or as Greta might pun “Al-Gore-isms”), …

You know who else uses sigma values don’t you?

"Chances are, you heard this month about the discovery of a tiny fundamental physics particle that may be the long-sought Higgs boson. The phrase five-sigma was tossed about by scientists to describe the strength of the discovery. So, what does five-sigma mean?

In short, five-sigma corresponds to a p-value, or probability, of 3x10-7, or about 1 in 3.5 million. This is not the probability that the Higgs boson does or doesn’t exist; rather, it is the probability that if the particle does not exist, the data that CERN scientists collected in Geneva, Switzerland, would be at least as extreme as what they observed. “The reason that it’s so annoying is that people want to hear declarative statements, like ‘The probability that there’s a Higgs is 99.9 percent,’ but the real statement has an ‘if’ in there. There’s a conditional. There’s no way to remove the conditional*,” says Kyle Cranmer, a physicist at New York University and member of the ATLAS team, one of the two groups that announced the new particle results in Geneva on July 4." https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/five-sigmawhats-that/

*Hmmm “conditional”…here’s an oblique…to me particle physics is like cutting through threads and saying that each end of the thread is a particle not a wave (also imagine the thread vibrating -frequency-), any “conditional” must take account of the complete inability to replicate the “slice”, time being what it is. We are ruled by Chronos…what was true this morning about our place in the universe will not be true this afternoon all is impermanence. Where does “Sigma” come from anyway? From social science babies, from epidemiology…define your data set…it cannot be unbounded…they posit that theirs is (hence “universal”), and therefore the results are “conditional”. O.K guys repeat the conditions…! I’m waiting …tik, tok, tik, tok… Like crypto-currencies they posit that Chronos is not sovereign…there is no sovereignty… there is no rule, there is no law, there is no moral compass……this is commonly known as EVIL… are those matters dark enough do you think?

[KarenEliot]

While appreciative of the reminder of the formula, I disagree that mathematics is analogous to grammar. But even if it were, it’s perfectly feasible to get through life and earn a good living without writing any reports in the same way that an experienced floor tiler will know that a small percentage of supplies will be too wonky to actually use so she or he will over-order slightly. No Casio needed. If there are no duff parts (s)he will cut a few inaccurately or break some by mistake but not need to rush off to ScrewFix, or granny’s funeral, part-way through the project.

If data is honestly gathered, and the people reporting the results are also trustworthy, then only a rather small cadre of statisticians is needed. Everyone else could rely on the reported results as relatively free from bias, rather than reflecting what the funders paid for, and make their own judgements accordingly.

And a percentage of them could write poems, rap, mow other people’s lawns, tile floors, and so on, rather than apply vainly for jobs with Pfizer.

The STEM Uber Alles agenda pretends that everyone who studies science will get a nice lucrative job and help to run the world. The people attracted to these studies tend to come from the class that already rules the world.

So Richi’s latest wheeze is typical Tory bullshit. Get a good job. Study hard. Listen to teacher. Learn to Code. Do what you’re told.

“Everybody can be a millionaire so everybody’s gotta try” (Matt Johnson)

[GKH]

Couldn’t disagree more K your analogy does not hold…without the language we are serfs…no more than that…pitiful creatures…you wouldn’t send a kid to school (at least not in this country), without shoes and a coat…Sigma penetrates into everything. now… maths is an art as it is a language, all science is…just as all art is also science… #yoga People are alienated because they are taught badly… the knowledge of algorithms and their applications should (and must), not be in the hands of a privileged elite.

[KarenEliot]

i don’t think we’re as far apart as you say G. But I was referring to grammar, not language.

My point is that SD should be considered as “grammar” if you like

Language is used for conceptualizing ideas and holding a debate

Grammar is a part of communicating clearly, sure, but it’s not of the essence.

Anyway I’ll leave it at that for now.

[GKH]

O.K you picked up on my sloppy terminology…I mean it is part of a language…language all those who do not wish to be exploited need to speak…

Here’s more; "What is the relationship between standard deviation and robustness in evolutionary algorithms?

Quote; "In case of evolutionary algorithms, when the obtained objection functions values are acceptable, a small value of standard deviation indicates that algorithm is more robust, is able to reproduce the solution with minimum discrepancy and has less dependency on initial population.

You can (find Ed.), many articles in good journals like information sciences and evolutionary computations. I have attached one article which present extensive tables for comparison of various evolutionary algorithms.

Short answer: when an optimization algorithm produces acceptable results in different runs, the lower the SD, the more robust and reliable is the algorithm. Low value of SD means that the algorithm results in almost similar answer in different runs. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4835425/"…

…“Always Standard deviation should be minimum. It should be applied for all the algorithms. Kindly refer the statistics books for your further clarification . So in your case you must relate, Standard deviation and variance should be less for sophisticated robustness of algorithm”. Go to: https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_the_relationship_between_standard_deviation_and_robustness_in_evolutionary_algorithmsrithms": https://www.arafel.co.uk/2018/03/the-whole-story-epidemiology.html

[GKH]

“only a rather small cadre of statisticians is needed” The trouble with d**n lies is that when a small group have all that power the rest of us suffer…far better to be a world full of people who can understand statistics (and are capable of asking the right questions), than a small group with their own interests at heart…it’s human nature K that’s the trouble with cabals…

[RobG]

Je pense donc je suis is a wonderful statement.

For me, it’s saying that the only thing that really exists is between your own ear lobes.

Everything else is illusion.

Those damn French drink far too much vin rouge.

[KarenEliot]

You’re right of course.

…at the moment we need one or more additional if {} then {}

I still think schooling is a least-worst option for parents who have to work to support their family unit. The underlying problem is work… if that were solved then schooling could be… ahem… reset.

I finished the Reversing Earth and potted review reads:

<<Rather dated but nevertheless interesting hypothesis: the Earth has flipped and/or tilted on its axis several times, causing catastrophic changes in sea levels, climactic disruption, and so on. The big problem with this book is the almost complete lack of citation, which makes it near impossible to inspect much of the evidence. He draws heavily on Velikovsky, and on ancient myths as well as picking up on counter-paradigmatic anomalies in geology, astronomy, etc. it’s good, and intriguing, not difficult to read, but the mechanics of how the planet could flip/topple were lost on me. I have a dreadful sense of spatial awareness, it’s not the author’s fault! If you enjoy Forteana, Hancock, von Daniken, and other heretics you’ll enjoy this too.>>

[GKH]

All Hail the Algorithm

[KarenEliot]

Looks interesting, bookmarked for later reference.

Algorithms may display the same prejudices as the programmers. But I’ll say a little more in a new thread.

[GKH]

Which is?

[KarenEliot]

Interacting with machines