= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Solvent comments on A History of Bayes' Theorem - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (85)
That was nicely written and fun to read. I might pick up that book.
A question: I found the odds ratio version of Bayes's theorem far more intuitive. Throughout history, has the equation ever been given as an odds ratio?
E.T. Jaynes used it a fair amount. I don't know how much others have used it.
I saw it put this way in a talk once. The talk was about integrating evidence from multiple sources to figure out if two biological macromolecules physically interact.
The reason, I think, is that this is a yes or no question. Most of the time, though, Bayes' theorem is used for numerical quantities: H means that a real world quantity X has a particular value x. But try to write it in the odds ratio form for this problem. You have to write probabilities given ~H, probabilities of the evidence just excluding a particular value of X, which is really awkward.