News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on What a debate about p-values shows about science. Parent comment

Re:What a debate about p-values shows about science by Bromskloss on Tuesday October 03, 2017 @12:57AM (#15390283)
> You are claiming that the "probability of seeing your data whether or not the hypothesis is correct", is often near the "probability the hypothesis is correct independent of your data"?

Shouldn't that be "the probability of seeing the data, _given_ that the hypothesis is correct" and "the probability of the hypothesis being correct, _given_ that the data has been observed"?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What a debate about p-values shows about science by nonbel on Tuesday October 03, 2017 @01:08AM (#15390321)
No, the other poster is referring to Bayes' rule P(A|B) = P(A)*P(B|A)/P(B).

The claim is that it is reasonable to assume P(A) ~ P(B), so that P(A|B) ~ P(B|A). I am referring to P(A) and P(B) in the equation.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What a debate about p-values shows about science by Bromskloss on Tuesday October 03, 2017 @08:08AM (#15391814)
Ah, OK, got it.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What a debate about p-values shows about science by nonbel on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @01:16AM (#15398407)
Its hard to tell over the internet, but if you are being sarcastic please let me know. I have no problem with clarifying further.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What a debate about p-values shows about science by Bromskloss on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @11:37AM (#15401229)
No sarcasm! I believe I understand what you were saying now.
[ Parent | on HN ]