Skip to main content
Cross Validated

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

12
  • 24
    $\begingroup$ +1 for marvelous answer that I totally agree with. I'm not accepting it (yet) since still hoping for other answers since the problem is broad. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 5, 2016 at 9:46
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Sure. I'd love to see someone else's perspective on this, too! $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 5, 2016 at 9:46
  • 29
    $\begingroup$ If you are forecasting a fair coin toss, then there is no way to get above 50% accuracy.. You said everything there. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 5, 2016 at 11:57
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ Using domain knowledge you can add new features to the first two cases (eg, time till Easter and TV viewing numbers, though the latter needs forecasting of its own) to get much better results. In neither case is the situation hopeless. The really interesting part is how to tell missing domain knowledge from a data set of fair coin flips. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 5, 2016 at 12:11
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ @KarolisJuodelė: that is exactly my point. We can't even know when our situation is hopeless, unless we talk to an expert... and then, sometimes the expert can't help us either, and there are "unknown unknowns" to the experts, which conceivably somebody else might know. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 5, 2016 at 12:13