Are there any good established systems for keeping track of a large number of hypotheses?
I’ve been using PredictionBook for this. Unfortunately it’s hard to compare competing hypotheses. It would be nice to have all related hypotheses on one page, but there really isn’t any mechanism to support that (tagging would be a start). The search is quite limited, as well. And due to the short comments, it’s rare and clumsy to detail the evidence for each hypothesis. I guess I could figure out how to add tagging and make a pull request at GitHub, but I don’t have time for that. I see someone has already filed a feature request for tags, so I’m not the only one who’d like that.
Ultimately I’d like to see something like analysis of competing hypotheses available, and I’d like to preserve the history, share this with other people, and get notifications when I should know the truth. I suppose putting a text file with the evidence in version control and also using PredictionBook might be the best approach for now. If anyone has any better ideas, I’d be interested in hearing them.
Edit: Searching and tagging would additionally be useful if you want to find previous data from which to construct a new prediction from. I’m particularly interested in this for estimating how long it takes to complete tasks, but I’ll have a separate database for that (which I intend to link to PredictionBook).
I also see there are other softwares for this methodology, but none of these seem quite like what I want. I’ll have to look closer.
Any other systems would be of interest to me. This is a good system for comparing competing hypotheses, but does nothing for the management of non-competing hypotheses (which could still be related).
Are there any good established systems for keeping track of a large number of hypotheses?
I’ve been using PredictionBook for this. Unfortunately it’s hard to compare competing hypotheses. It would be nice to have all related hypotheses on one page, but there really isn’t any mechanism to support that (tagging would be a start). The search is quite limited, as well. And due to the short comments, it’s rare and clumsy to detail the evidence for each hypothesis. I guess I could figure out how to add tagging and make a pull request at GitHub, but I don’t have time for that. I see someone has already filed a feature request for tags, so I’m not the only one who’d like that.
Ultimately I’d like to see something like analysis of competing hypotheses available, and I’d like to preserve the history, share this with other people, and get notifications when I should know the truth. I suppose putting a text file with the evidence in version control and also using PredictionBook might be the best approach for now. If anyone has any better ideas, I’d be interested in hearing them.
Edit: Searching and tagging would additionally be useful if you want to find previous data from which to construct a new prediction from. I’m particularly interested in this for estimating how long it takes to complete tasks, but I’ll have a separate database for that (which I intend to link to PredictionBook).
Now after I post this, I see there has been a brief discussion of analysis of competing hypotheses before on LessWrong, from which you can find an open source software for the methodology (GitHub).
I also see there are other softwares for this methodology, but none of these seem quite like what I want. I’ll have to look closer.
Any other systems would be of interest to me. This is a good system for comparing competing hypotheses, but does nothing for the management of non-competing hypotheses (which could still be related).