Looks like the contra community is liking stuff on machine learning, and I thought it would be interesting to share another article we put together about why machine learning models can underperform for... just no obvious reason.
Despite having clean data and tuned hyperparameters, the accuracy graph barely moves.
The trick here is everything related to feature engineering. We wrote a piece titled “Feature engineering decides machine learning outcomes” to share our thoughts on this quasi-"mystic" exercise.
I call it quasi-"mystic" because it is part art and part science. You have to be able to see through the rubble of messy data and know what will really move the needle for you. Much like the jeweller in our cover.
It breaks down the essentials, from understanding your data’s structure to choosing well-validated features.
Read the full piece here: https://www.algorithmic.co/blogs/feature-engineering-decides-machine-learning-outcomes
A small milestone, but one I’m genuinely happy about.
I just earned a new Expert badge on Contra!
It’s a nice reminder of how much I’ve learned through building products, working with clients, joining hackathons, and constantly exploring new ways to build with AI.
I've heard this from 3 different startups this year.
So I built one.
Metriva is an AI-powered business analyst that:
📊 Turns messy spreadsheets into executive dashboards
🧠 Writes C-level business briefs automatically
📈 Forecasts trends + detects anomalies
💬 Answers questions about your data in plain English
🎯 Finds your Pareto 80/20 — who drives 80% of your revenue?
No SQL. No Python. No data team.
Just upload your file and get answers.
Built with Flask, vanilla JS, and a lot of late nights.
The brief-writing piece is interesting — curious how you handle the validation step. AI-generated language tends to sound confident even when the underlying data is sparse or the trend is ambiguous. One pattern that helps: have the model output a confidence signal alongside the...