It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
you do not seem to have any sort of grasp on Bayesian statistics/probability. You continuously attempt to make it into something your high school mathematics can explain, and that ain't happening...is it?
I do not need these "unknowns" you speak of
JadeStar
What Tanka doesn't get is that saying: "There is a 94% chance that there is a planet like the Earth within 10 light years around an M-dwarf star." is far, Far, FAR different from saying "There's a planet like the Earth around Barnard's Star, and there are intelligent aliens from there visiting the Earth on a regular basis."
ZetaRediculian
reply to post by tanka418
Actually, I have been using Bayesian statistics successfully for some time and am quite familiar with it. It is not as mysterious and complex as you make it out to be. There is nothing wrong with the examples I provided as they accurately demonstrate how Bayesian statistics can be applied.
well then you aren't using anything related to Bayesian statistics. Do you have any examples of how this would work? You said it is the same math so it should be very simple to provide an example.
the probability of you coming up with a working example is zero.
There are as many reasons they could come here, as opposed to why they wouldn't.
*
*
ZetaRediculian
reply to post by tanka418
just produce an example.
tanka418
ZetaRediculian
reply to post by tanka418
just produce an example.
perhaps...in time...when I have the time...but not now.
tanka418
ZetaRediculian
reply to post by tanka418
just produce an example.
perhaps...in time...when I have the time...but not now.
It would help IF you gave a small indication that you actually DID understand Bayesian probability...but you don't seem to even have the proper "Bayesian vocabulary"...so it becomes very difficult to discuss this.
Which is also to say: do you have any knowledge of the equations involved here, or the algorithm to use? I'm betting NO.
ZetaRediculian
I have absolutely nothing to prove to you. I use Bayesian algorithms successfully and have for some time. Its not rocket science. I'm not a mathematician and there is no secret language I need to speak in order to prove anything. There is absolutely no need to discuss the equations. All is needed is the basic concepts and the definition you provided. You are making the claim, you need to prove it.
do you need me to copy and paste a wiki article and then reference my web site like you have done?
tanka418
ZetaRediculian
I have absolutely nothing to prove to you. I use Bayesian algorithms successfully and have for some time. Its not rocket science. I'm not a mathematician and there is no secret language I need to speak in order to prove anything. There is absolutely no need to discuss the equations. All is needed is the basic concepts and the definition you provided. You are making the claim, you need to prove it.
do you need me to copy and paste a wiki article and then reference my web site like you have done?
No, no wiki articles. I want you to post the math!
I'll tell ya what...IF you post a real example of Bayesian Inference, I will too. But, you see... I don't believe you know what the equations are, you don't know what the algorithm is, you haven't got a clue what I'm trying to talk about. You have plugged in your high school math and expect it to work...in an instance where it can't. This has been a long time habit of yours, attack somebodies idea, procedure, etc. when it threatens our world, and try to prove your point by frustrating the issue.
You show me that you know enough about Bayesian probability and I will provide you with the content you have requested.
Further; IF you have nothing to prove to me, then I have nothing to prove to you.
edit on 4-2-2014 by tanka418 because: (no reason given)
draknoir2
There's that tone of superiority again, even as you sidestep backing up your claims of mathematical prowess.
We the clueless await education.
You show me that you know enough about Bayesian probability and I will provide you with the content you have requested
ZetaRediculian
reply to post by tanka418
why? You said you have no need for known outcomes with the way you use this.
tanka418
draknoir2
There's that tone of superiority again, even as you sidestep backing up your claims of mathematical prowess.
We the clueless await education.
And still you misinterpret. I'm not trying to be "superior", and do not feel that I am. However, it seems to me that ZR does not know what I am talking about. I say this because there are certain things he should have mentioned, and didn't. Again, I don't want to sound "superior", but, I don't feel like arguing with someone about something they don't understand.
IF he were to give some small, remote indication he knew anything at all it would be vastly different.
I am prepared to post examples, and links just as soon as ZR posts up the general equations for Bayes Inference and a small but reasonably knowledgeable explanation.
If this does not work for you, then we have nothing to talk about, and I'll thank you to remain out of any discussions I have on probability. By the way: ZR has a probability of 0.0017 of actually knowing anything about this...approximately.
Astyanax
reply to post by draknoir2
We the clueless await education.
I want to sign up for his class, too.
As I said, I am prepared with university papers, white papers of my own, computer software, and a couple of those precious examples you so desperately want.
All you have to do is provide us with the general equations for Bayesian Inference and a brief explanation.
private void infereToolStripMenuItem_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
[
double oodds = 0L;
double Ph = 0L;
double tnum = Math.Truncate(Convert.ToDouble(textBox2.Text));
oodds = Math.Pow(10L, Convert.ToDouble(textBox2.Text) - tnum) - tnum;
// oodds *= Math.Pow(10L, tnum);
textBox1.Text = (1 / oodds).ToString();
double Peh = 1L; // 0.999999999999;
double Pc = 1 / oodds;
if(Phe == 0L)
Ph = 1L; //7E-6;
else
Ph = Phe;
// P(H/E) = (P(E/H) * P(H))/P(E)
// P(E) = (P(E/H) * P(H)) + Pc
Phe = (Peh * Ph) / ((Peh * Ph) + Pc);
label3.Text =Phe.ToString();
subsequent = true;
]
waltwillis
It appears to me that you enjoy playing the devils advocate more
then sharing what you do know with others.
tanka418
We can actually substitute the "known" probabilities against ET and we can use other probabilities that have been determined by any of the various sciences in our updating process.
tanka418
You continue to misinterpret what II said. Bayesian Inference is not unlike any other form of divination...the unknown is inferred from the known.
oops...almost forgot... a method from an application I wrote specifically for Bayesian Inference...