4 ms·
I appreciate the theoretical aspects of it as well -- however, I could never get over the notion that bayesians need to use frequentist statistics to judge whet
by wheresmycraisin 6y ago
I appreciate the theoretical aspects of it as well -- however, I could never get over the notion that bayesians need to use frequentist statistics to judge whether the chain has sufficiently converged... isn't that defeating the entire point?
- soVeryTired 6y agoInteresting point, but I think the academic culture has taken a pragmatic shift: there aren't many 'pure' bayesians or frequentists left anymore, and the boundary between the two viewpoints has softened. Stats has more of a 'shut up and calculate' mentality about it these days.
- sgt101 6y ago>Stats has more of a 'shut up and calculate' mentality about it these days. I'm happy that the "pure this pure that" fundamentalism has faded into retirement... but shut up and calculate has problems - especially around causality. The "blessings of multiple causes" paper for example.
- wheresmycraisin 6y agoThen why bother pretending to calculate a posterior distribution when you can do a MLE estimator with regularization or something?