...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Mathematical Psychology >An evaluation of alternative methods for testing hypotheses, from the perspective of Harold Jeffreys
【24h】

An evaluation of alternative methods for testing hypotheses, from the perspective of Harold Jeffreys

机译:从哈罗德·杰弗里斯的角度对替代假设检验方法的评估

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Our original article provided a relatively detailed summary of Harold Jeffreys's philosophy on statistical hypothesis testing. In response, Robert (2016) maintains that Bayes factors have a number of serious shortcomings. These shortcomings, Robert argues, may be addressed by an alternative approach that conceptualizes model selection as parameter estimation in a mixture model. In a second comment, Chandramouli and Shiffrin (2016) seek to extend Jeffreys's framework by also taking into consideration data distributions that do not originate from either of the models under test. In this rejoinder we argue that Robert's (2016) alternative view on testing has more in common with Jeffreys's Bayes factor than he suggests, as they share the same "shortcomings". On the other hand, we show that the proposition of Chandramouli and Shiffrin (2016) to extend the Bayes factor is in fact further removed from Jeffreys's view on testing than the authors suggest. By elaborating on these points, we hope to clarify our case for Jeffreys's Bayes factors. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
机译:我们的原始文章提供了Harold Jeffreys关于统计假设检验的哲学的相对详细的摘要。作为回应,Robert(2016)认为贝叶斯因素存在许多严重缺陷。罗伯特认为,这些缺点可以通过将模型选择概念化为混合模型中的参数估计的替代方法来解决。在第二条评论中,Chandramouli和Shiffrin(2016)寻求扩展Jeffreys的框架,方法是同时考虑并非源自两个测试模型的数据分布。在本文的再讨论中,我们认为罗伯特(2016年)关于测试的替代观点与杰弗里斯的贝叶斯因数相比,他的建议具有更多共同点,因为它们具有相同的“缺点”。另一方面,我们表明,Chandramouli和Shiffrin(2016)提出的扩展贝叶斯因子的命题实际上已经从杰弗里斯的测试观点中移开了,超出了作者的建议。通过详细说明这些观点,我们希望阐明有关杰弗里斯贝叶斯因素的论据。 (C)2016 Elsevier Inc.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号