3 ms·
But you can't run the same election 10 times. Without hearing the interview, I'm going to guess he's talking about multiple states, all with 60% chance of winni
by Wilduck 14y ago
But you can't run the same election 10 times. Without hearing the interview, I'm going to guess he's talking about multiple states, all with 60% chance of winning, which puts us in a different place entirely.
I guess I'm not disagreeing with the main point of your post. Just your use of the phrase "something would happen 60% of the time", as being oddly frequentist, when a Bayesian perspective is more appropriate here.
- pseut 14y ago> But you can't run the same election 10 times. That makes assessment difficult, but is irrelevant for interpretation. If something happens 60% of the time, it happens with the same probability as drawing a red ball from an urn with 6 red balls and 4 green balls, whether it happens once or several times. Trying to determine the quality of a model using some observed data is inherently a frequentist exercise -- a dyed-in-the-wool Bayesian would take the election results, use them to update his or her posterior distributions, and carry on happily. (I know that no one would actually do this; no one who analyzes data is really a "pure" Bayesian or a "pure" frequentist).