[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
On the issue of holding precision constant over time--a slight modification...
- To: Rao Kambhampati <rao@asu.edu>
- Subject: On the issue of holding precision constant over time--a slight modification...
- From: Subbarao Kambhampati <rao@asu.edu>
- Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 19:27:12 -0700
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=iBg+323eZS/tibJPg7mMmqIdDhHTFYLb1tHYmCeJuXQ=; b=thnKzoPY9CXyPP7Z5xNlPR+frjP1GGKteZdLqV4A9jyt7qDvmxpLAnyzXi4mavjf6K XXcMPkSOO+OYiS3WNrY7e27xs86uxn13N4JFlZC9h3IRW42zyfy0S3k6Fa5ofGNgRwh4 E4YN48B3h3lmtwXh4o+7raTO3jSczNYJKOAVQ=
- Sender: subbarao2z2@gmail.com
So while Jadiel is right that in general precision can't be held constant w.r.t time, there are two important exceptions--namely precision at 1 and precision at 0.
If you only give the relevant answers and nothing but the relevant answers, then your precision remains at 1 at successive periods. Similarly, if you only give irrelevant answers and nothing but irrelevant answers, your precision remains at 0 at successive periods.
Rao