Announcement

**OzzyKP** · June 2, 2012, 00:15

Originally posted by MOBIUS View Post

I think you may have hit the nail on the head there.

Despite being relatively successful, he realises that since he has chosen materialistic worth as he chosen benchmark, he is still massively underachieving by his standards...

Sucks to be him.

Considering he can snap his fingers and get a horde of sycophants on this site to stroke his ego whenever he wishes, I'm guessing he'll be rather content.

**Dauphin** · June 2, 2012, 02:59

Originally posted by KrazyHorse View Post

Am I going to have to write out the toy model explicitly, or will one of you lesser minds do me the favor?

If Poly had a like button, I would press it to reflect you are getting more from someone who answers than just an answer.

I'll readily admit I don't understand the framing of the question, so I'll post a random link.

Bivariate Normal Distribution -- from Wolfram MathWorld

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/BivariateNormalDistribution.html

The bivariate normal distribution is the statistical distribution with probability density function P(x_1,x_2)=1/(2pisigma_1sigma_2sqrt(1-rho^2))exp[-z/(2(1-rho^2))], (1) where z=((x_1-mu_1)^2)/(sigma_1^2)-(2rho(x_1-mu_1)(x_2-mu_2))/(sigma_1sigma_2)+((x_2-mu_2)^2)/(sigma_2^2), (2) and rho=cor(x_1,x_2)=(V_(12))/(sigma_1sigma_2) (3) is the correlation of x_1 and x_2 (Kenney and Keeping 1951, pp. 92 and 202-205; Whittaker and Robinson 1967, p. 329) and V_(12) is the covariance. The...

**Jon Miller** · June 2, 2012, 08:02

Originally posted by KrazyHorse View Post

Not at all...I would consider "underachieving" in this context to mean "conditioned on intelligence, performs lower than average". And as I mentioned to Jon, it's pretty clear that conditioning on intelligence at the top end of the distribution gains you a lot less than you would think, naively

This has no bearing on the experimental constraints, which is why one would have to begin with identifying genius via achievement.

Unless you are maintaining that no external measures are available to identify genius, in which case it is impossible to design an experiment to determine people at the extremes (and you also disagree with the experts in the field).

JM
(edit: to repeat, it does not matter if only 1% of the extremes get identified via achievement, the only thing needed (For discovery) is to identify the extreme. This has already been done. The next part is to create a training sample (which has not been done) and classification scheme. A well determined classification for the average (central ~3 sigma) will give no information other than a person being above the 3 sigma and with just that information it would be impossible to create a classification scheme for the >5 sigma level).

Announcement

How do you guys deal...

Comment

Comment

Comment