4 ms·
This helped a non-statistician like myself understand what it is I was supposedly taught wrong: https://xkcd.com/1132/ https://xkcd.com/1132/ (I still only sor
by chuckadams 1y ago
This helped a non-statistician like myself understand what it is I was supposedly taught wrong: https://xkcd.com/1132/ https://xkcd.com/1132/
(I still only sorta get it: I know it's reductionist so as to be funny, but to me those dice are quite literally a hidden variable)
- firejake308 1y agoYou're right that the dice are literally intended to represent a hidden variable. The difference between the frequentost and the Bayesian is that the frequentist only accounts for the hidden variable, whereas the Bayesian also accounts for the pre-test probability of the sun exploding. Since the probability of the sun exploding is 1 in a bazillion, multiplying that by 35 still gives you a very very low post-test probability that the sun has gone nova because 35 in a bazillion is still pretty unlikely
- usgroup 1y agoIt depends what the null hypothesis is here, but by construction, under a reasonable null, the p-value for an appropriate test would not be acceptable under a Frequentist framework.
- rawgabbit 1y agoIt is like running a casino versus gambling as an individual. If I was running a casino and presiding over tens of thousands of bets daily, I would use frequency statistics to guarantee the house always wins. If I was an individual gambler and determining my odds at a particular bet, I would use Bayesian.