= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Lumifer comments on Open Thread, Jun. 8 - Jun. 14, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (153)
In the Bayesian framework "evidence" basically means "relevant information" -- data which will (or could) affect the probabilities you're considering.
Can't help you with French, but I would rather go more generic ("information"), than more specific with wrong connotations ("clue", "proof", "sign"). Actually, "proof" is explicitly wrong.
Ah, but "preuve" and "proof" do not retain the same meaning, even though they are as words direct translations.
In Italian there's the same problem: "evidenza" doesn't quite cover it, and "prova" has a better connotation, in my opinion.
OK, but even if preuve/prova do not carry the same meaning of "solved, we known this" as "proof" in English, wouldn't they still have the strong connotation of an argument in favour of a theory?
The interesting thing about the Bayesian evidence is that it can support your hypothesis, but it can also make it less likely.