| ▲ | dylan604 a day ago | |
It sounds like something with a 90% error rate would be better to just do the opposite of what was determined and suddenly have a 10% error rate?? | ||
| ▲ | eks391 a day ago | parent [-] | |
That's not how type 1 & type 2 errors work. The article is describing type 2 (false negative) and inverting the output has no correlation with the percent of false positives (type 1) | ||