Not that I know of. It would be possible to add in a factor. I imagine that you’ve just increased the “size of the pool”. And can proceed accordingly.
What is the nature of the prior knowledge? I suppose predictions are possible.
I know people who read 100 resumes and interview the ones they think would be fit for the role. Anywhere from 0-15 candidates. It depends on how specific the role is and how urgent the job is.
The confusion I’m trying to resolve is it feels like saving the best for last, if you have priors (assuming no attrition in the pool, which is obviously false). The intuition here is you’re using some % of the pool for calibration purposes, and should not be using your best prospects for calibration.
It would depend how far away the candidates are from each other. 5% apart, 10% apart or 1% apart.
Yes, the original problem assumes that you know nothing. If I were adapting for knowledge, I would be doing something very different and I can’t think of what on short notice because that knowledge could be very variable
Not that I know of. It would be possible to add in a factor. I imagine that you’ve just increased the “size of the pool”. And can proceed accordingly.
What is the nature of the prior knowledge? I suppose predictions are possible.
I know people who read 100 resumes and interview the ones they think would be fit for the role. Anywhere from 0-15 candidates. It depends on how specific the role is and how urgent the job is.
The confusion I’m trying to resolve is it feels like saving the best for last, if you have priors (assuming no attrition in the pool, which is obviously false). The intuition here is you’re using some % of the pool for calibration purposes, and should not be using your best prospects for calibration.
It would depend how far away the candidates are from each other. 5% apart, 10% apart or 1% apart.
Yes, the original problem assumes that you know nothing. If I were adapting for knowledge, I would be doing something very different and I can’t think of what on short notice because that knowledge could be very variable