If it was the collection of a variety of expert opinions, I took the prediction of the median expert.
Hmm, I wonder if we’re not losing valuable data this way. E.g. you mentioned that before 1990, there were no predictions with a timeline of more than 50 years, but I seem to recall that one of the surveys from the seventies or eighties had experts giving such predictions. Do we have a reason to treat the surveys as a single prediction, if there’s the possibility to break them down into X independent predictions? That’s obviously not possible if the survey only gives summary statistics, but at least some of them did say things like “8 experts in this survey put AI 20 years away”.
That would also allow us to implement Carl’s suggestion of comparing self-selected and non-self-selected experts—otherwise there won’t be enough non-self-selected predictions to do anything useful with.
Hmm, I wonder if we’re not losing valuable data this way. E.g. you mentioned that before 1990, there were no predictions with a timeline of more than 50 years, but I seem to recall that one of the surveys from the seventies or eighties had experts giving such predictions. Do we have a reason to treat the surveys as a single prediction, if there’s the possibility to break them down into X independent predictions? That’s obviously not possible if the survey only gives summary statistics, but at least some of them did say things like “8 experts in this survey put AI 20 years away”.
That would also allow us to implement Carl’s suggestion of comparing self-selected and non-self-selected experts—otherwise there won’t be enough non-self-selected predictions to do anything useful with.
Possible. The whole data analysis process is very open to improvements.