Think Bayes: Bayesian Statistics Made Simple (2012)

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Nov 19, 2017, 10:38 PM UTC

boostedsignal wrote: post #38

wodenokoto wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You write that the frequentist doesn't answer the question, but it does. It answers P(H') = (H/H+T)^H' You also write that the frequentist solution fails to give an error estimate, yet you don't show that the Bayesian solution does give one. If the goal of the article is to show that Bayesian is more correct than frequentist then it leaves the reader unconvinced. If the goal is to show 3 ways of finding a probability…

> You write that the frequentist doesn't answer the question, but it does. It answers: P(H') = (H/H+T)^H' The question was asking for P(H' | H, T), not P(H'). > You also write that the frequentist solution fails to give an error estimate, yet you don't show that the Bayesian solution does give one. Because there is no error? In the proof I assume P(p) is known and then after that every step follows from a law of prob…

Post by clircle » Mon, Nov 20, 2017, 12:39 AM UTC

folksinger wrote: post #18

Let's take a recent election as an example: A Bayesian pollster began with a certain set of prior probabilities. That the college educated were more likely to vote in previous elections, for example, informed the sample population, because it wouldn't make much sense to ask the opinions of those who would stay home. Thus, based on priors that were updated with new empirical data, a new set of probabilities emerged, t…

Post by bhattisatish » Mon, Nov 20, 2017, 3:18 AM UTC

badminton1 wrote: post #2

Thanks for posting this. The Jupyter notebooks (and the fact Github has built-in support for them) really help illustrating the concepts. The book I've used so far to study is "Probability and Statistics: The Science of Uncertainty", by Michael J. Evans and Jeffrey S. Rosenthal. This book is not being published anymore and is free in PDF form.

Post by innocentoldguy » Mon, Nov 20, 2017, 4:30 AM UTC

leephillips wrote: post #41

innocentoldguy wrote: post #20

“I broke this rule because I developed some of the code while I was a Visiting Scientist at Google, so I followed the Google style guide, which deviates from PEP 8 in a few places. Once I got used to Google style, I found that I liked it. And at this point, it would be too much trouble to change.” Why would you write a book that targets the Python community and ignore PEP8 styling, inconveniencing an entire community…

From the PEP8 style guide: "Many projects have their own coding style guidelines. In the event of any conflicts, such project-specific guides take precedence for that project." and "A Foolish Consistency is the Hobgoblin of Little Minds". And, throughout, PEP8 makes it clear that it is a set of recommendations, and that if a project or community already has an established style, it need not be changed.

Post by franklin_cobb » Mon, Nov 20, 2017, 5:43 AM UTC

leephillips wrote: post #41

innocentoldguy wrote: post #20

“I broke this rule because I developed some of the code while I was a Visiting Scientist at Google, so I followed the Google style guide, which deviates from PEP 8 in a few places. Once I got used to Google style, I found that I liked it. And at this point, it would be too much trouble to change.” Why would you write a book that targets the Python community and ignore PEP8 styling, inconveniencing an entire community…

From the PEP8 style guide: "Many projects have their own coding style guidelines. In the event of any conflicts, such project-specific guides take precedence for that project." and "A Foolish Consistency is the Hobgoblin of Little Minds". And, throughout, PEP8 makes it clear that it is a set of recommendations, and that if a project or community already has an established style, it need not be changed.