Reply to post:

Was this quake AI a little too artificial? Nature-published research accused of boosting accuracy by mixing training, testing data

Neoc

Call me Mr Silly, but why not simply remove the suspect data from the result set and see how the model's prediction rate is affected? Or just re-run a new set of data that doesn't contain the suspect data-set? The fact that this was not even considered makes me look askance at the original paper. After all, one of the requirements of a scientific experiment is that it should be reproducible (and preferably modifiable).

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon