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.

benelliott comments on XKCD - Frequentist vs. Bayesians - Less Wrong Discussion

18 Post author: brilee 09 November 2012 05:25AM

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

Comments (89)

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

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 09 November 2012 05:09:08PM 16 points [-]

Two subtleties here:

1) The neutrino detector is evidence that the Sun has exploded. It's showing an observation which is 36^H^H 35 times more likely to appear if the Sun has exploded than if it hasn't (likelihood ratio of 35:1). The Bayesian just doesn't think that's strong enough evidence to overcome the prior odds, i.e., after multiplying the prior odds by 35 they still aren't very high.

2) If the Sun has exploded, the Bayesian doesn't lose very much from paying off this bet.

Comment author: benelliott 09 November 2012 05:25:29PM 14 points [-]

Nitpick, the detector lies on double-six regardless of the outcome, so the likelihood ratio is 35:1, not 36:1.