Re:When physics meets biology: a less known Feynman
by vibrio on Tuesday May 15, 2018 @09:19AM
(#17073667)
But very different things are being measured--comparing them this way is very flawed.
Re:When physics meets biology: a less known Feynman
by nonbel on Tuesday May 15, 2018 @09:32AM
(#17073763)
Not sure what you mean but my post was a sarcastic comment about how people choose an arbitrary level of significance so that the "right number" of "discoveries" can be published each year.
If there is a lot of data they would have too many "discoveries" (it would seem too easy) so they need a more stringent threshold. If the data is very expensive they would have too few "discoveries" so the threshold gets relaxed.
Re:When physics meets biology: a less known Feynman
by vibrio on Tuesday May 15, 2018 @03:03PM
(#17076712)
Pardon, I have a weak ability to detect sarcasm before finishing my first coffee. I fully agree that p-value limits are arbitrary, and what one is examining can greatly impact the interpretation of 'significance' or not. As you imply, data can be inflationary , incrementally increasing in volume and decreasing in value.
For example, in physics they require p < 3e-7 for a discovery. While in biology it is p < 0.05 and sometimes even p < .1 is allowed.