3 ms·
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
by cdchn 2y ago
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
- andreareina 2y agoIf you've looked, it is. The more and the better you look, the better evidence it is.
- kelseyfrog 2y agoIf you run it through bayes theorem, it adjusts the posterior very little.
- cwillu 2y agoIf a test almost always finds something, then the failure of that test to find something is strong evidence.
- kelseyfrog 2y agoI'd be happy to see you numbers for estimated likelihood, prior, and marginal probability if you have them. I'm curious what you get.
- kelseyfrog 2y agoThank you. I've updated my initial guess of p(critical bugs | did not find critical bugs) from 0.5 to 0.82 given my estimate of likelihood and base rates.
- nine_k 2y agos/evidence/proof/. Evidence of absence ("we searched really carefully and nothing came up") does update the Bayesian priors significantly, so the probability of absence of bugs can now be estimated as much higher.