BS measure

[glen ropella]

http://www.blablameter.com/index.php

FWIW, I ran some sample text from me, Steve, Marcus, Jochen, and Pamela
through it.  My score was highest, at 0.18! I was followed closely by
Steve at 0.17, Jochen at 0.16, Marcus at 0.14, and Pamela at 0.12.

Running some output from http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/ got scores of
0.3 and 0.4.  Scigen got scores of 0.26 and 0.42.


--
⇒⇐ glen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

[Marcus G. Daniels]

On 11/7/13, 4:24 PM, glen wrote:
> Running some output from http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/ got scores of
> 0.3 and 0.4.  Scigen got scores of 0.26 and 0.42.
Why pull punches?
How about on some PLOS Biology articles?  Or some arXiv Statistical
Mechanics papers?

Marcus


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

[glen ropella]

On 11/07/2013 03:40 PM, Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
> Why pull punches?
> How about on some PLOS Biology articles?  Or some arXiv Statistical
> Mechanics papers?

I was afraid. 8^)

http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001700;jsessionid=6B03ACB79CF5144724DBFE9F4FC73AFC

=> 0.42

http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001699;jsessionid=6B03ACB79CF5144724DBFE9F4FC73AFC

=> 0.45

http://arxiv.org/abs/1302.5162v1

=> 0.24

http://www.policymic.com/articles/47355/edward-snowden-interview-transcript-full-text-read-the-guardian-s-entire-interview-with-the-man-who-leaked-prism

=> 0.30


--
⇒⇐ glen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

[Steve Smith]

> http://www.blablameter.com/index.php
>
> FWIW, I ran some sample text from me, Steve, Marcus, Jochen, and Pamela
> through it.  My score was highest, at 0.18! I was followed closely by
> Steve at 0.17, Jochen at 0.16, Marcus at 0.14, and Pamela at 0.12.
>
I considered doing the same, but realized that few if any of my missives
are under the 15,000 character limit and most everyone else's don't
reach the 5 lower line limit!

I'm curious what their heuristic/metric might be as I'm a firm believer
that one person's signal is another person's noise.

I can imagine getting a high (low?) score myself based on (over)use of
qualifiers, of run-on-sentences and with a human in the loop, possible
(seeming) non-sequitors... but I doubt blablameter can detect a
non-sequitor.   I suppose it might also use some kind of
word-frequency/lexicon/thesaurus to determine how many "esoteric" words
are used...

This can't be the only measure out there purporting to do this type of
thing.   I didn't (without trying hard) find any background on this
tool/project... do we know more about it?




============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

[glen ropella]

On 11/07/2013 05:36 PM, Steve Smith wrote:
> This can't be the only measure out there purporting to do this type of
> thing.   I didn't (without trying hard) find any background on this
> tool/project... do we know more about it?

Not really.  There's plenty of stuff online, though:

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&prev=_dd&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blablameter.de%2Ffragen_und_antworten.html

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=blablameter

--
⇒⇐ glen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

[Arlo Barnes]

"In the language of science often an exaggerated face style has crept. It also often serves to order the "bush" herumzutexten - in this respect, there are parallels to the typical PR language."
I am sure we have all thought this at one time or another. It is disappointing the metrics are not open-source, let alone free.
Somebody on one of the lists last week linked the SnarXiv, that would probably appropriate fodder for analysis if it was just more than titles...well, we will have to settle for SciGen. Time Cube got
"Your text: 15000 characters, 2340 words. Bullshit Index: 0.12, Your text shows only a few indications of 'bullshit'-English."
which is pretty suspect :P.

-Arlo

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

[glen ropella]

On 11/08/2013 11:20 AM, Arlo Barnes wrote:
> Time Cube<http://timecube.com>got "Your text: 15000 characters, 2340
> words. Bullshit Index: 0.12, Your text shows only a few indications
> of 'bullshit'-English." which is pretty suspect :P.

Ha!  I forgot about the time cube.  Surely there's a difference between
batsh!t versus bullsh!t.  I also forgot about
megahal<http://megahal.alioth.debian.org/>.  I need to dig up my old
megahal database I primed with the rantings of a right winger on one
mailing list and see how it measures up on blablameter.com.

FWIW the text from the "vortex math" page <http://vortexmath.webs.com/>
got a 0.39, but Rodin Aerodynamics
<http://rense.com/rodinaerodynamics.htm> only got a 0.08.  George
Green's
<http://www.nohoax.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=20&catid=1>
got 0.21.

--
⇒⇐ glen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com