Measurement of Statistical Evidence: Picking Up Where Hacking and Others Left Off.
Hacking's Law of Likelihood says--paraphrasing--that data support hypothesis H1 over hypothesis H2 whenever the likelihood ratio (LR) for H1 over H exceeds 1. But Hacking later noted a seemingly fatal flaw in the LR itself: it cannot be interpreted as the degree of "evidential significance" across a...
| Publicado en: | Philosophy of Science Vol. 84; no. 5; pp. 853 - 866 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Cambridge University Press
Dec2017
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=126784766&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 126784766 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00318248 PSC jtl: Philosophy of Science issn: 00318248 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Dec2017 vid: 84 iid: 5 pid: 15979 pub: Cambridge University Press artinfo: ui: 126784766 10.1086/693931 ppf: 853 ppct: 13 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 423KB tig: atl: Measurement of Statistical Evidence: Picking Up Where Hacking and Others Left Off. aug: au: Vieland, Veronica J. su: Computer hacking Hypothesis Philosophers Likelihood ratio tests Evidentialism sug: subj: Computer hacking Hypothesis Philosophers Likelihood ratio tests Evidentialism ab: Hacking's Law of Likelihood says--paraphrasing--that data support hypothesis H1 over hypothesis H2 whenever the likelihood ratio (LR) for H1 over H exceeds 1. But Hacking later noted a seemingly fatal flaw in the LR itself: it cannot be interpreted as the degree of "evidential significance" across applications. I agree with Hacking about the problem, but I do not believe the condition is incurable. I argue here that the LR can be properly calibrated with respect to the underlying evidence, and I sketch the rudiments of a methodology for so doing. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Philosophy of Science is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Philosophy of Science holder: Cambridge University Press dt: @attributes: year: 2017 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|