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.

Lumifer comments on Bayesian Reasoning - Explained Like You're Five - Less Wrong Discussion

5 Post author: Satoshi_Nakamoto 24 July 2015 03:59AM

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

Comments (6)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Lumifer 24 July 2015 04:11:50PM *  -1 points [-]

This is a badly written wall of text which isn't improved by pictures. Moreover, it starts by confusing frequency with probability (let me quote Andrew Gelman when faced with the same error: "Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck. No no no no no").

Comment author: Satoshi_Nakamoto 25 July 2015 02:58:32AM 0 points [-]

Ok. Thanks for letting me know. I have removed the first example. I was thinking that it would make it simpler if I started out with an example that didn't look at evidence, but I think it is better without it.

If anyone wants to know the difference between frequency and probability. See the below quote:

“A probability is something that we assign, in order to represent a state of knowledge, or that we calculate from previously assigned probabilities according to the rules of probability theory. A frequency is a factual property of the real world that we measure or estimate. [...] The fundamental, inescapable distinction between probability and frequency lies in this relativity principle: probabilities change when we change our state of knowledge; frequencies do not. It follows that the probability p(E) that we assign to an event E can be equal to its frequency f (E) only for certain particular states of knowledge. Intuitively, one would expect this to be the case when the only information we have about E consists of its observed frequency.” Jaynes, E. (2003), Probability Theory: The Logic of Science, New York, Cambridge University Press, pg. 292