You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Luke_A_Somers comments on Where did mathematics begin to disagree between frequentist and Bayesian statistics, and why? - Less Wrong Discussion

1 [deleted] 14 July 2012 03:57AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (20)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Luke_A_Somers 15 July 2012 01:13:44PM 0 points [-]

Your ability to distinguish them that way means that there was a large likelihood ratio from the evidence.

Comment author: Cyan 16 July 2012 02:41:57AM 4 points [-]

A large likelihood ratio? I have two likelihood functions -- at what values of the parameter arguments should I evaluate them when forming the ratio? Given that one of the versions is nested in the other at the boundary of the parameter space (Gaussian errors versus Student-t errors with degrees of freedom fit to the data), what counts as a large enough likelihood ratio to prefer the more general version of the model?