Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    The likelihood ratio of naked statistical evidence in cas... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The likelihood ratio of naked statistical evidence in cases such as Prisoner and Gatecrasher is strictly speaking unknown, not determinately one or greater than one.

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hacking's frequentist constraint holds that probability statements require a well-defined reference class, and naked statistics like '60% of prisoners escaped' underdetermine the reference class.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When the reference class is underdetermined, the likelihood ratio inherits that indeterminacy and cannot be resolved to a single value by logical analysis alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Walley's imprecise probability framework formalizes this: where evidence underdetermines the reference class, the rational response is a set of likelihoods, not a point estimate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The likelihood ratio requires specifying a precise alternative hypothesis, but naked statistical evidence fixes no such alternative, leaving the ratio formally undefined.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Keynes's weight-of-evidence concept shows that low evidential weight entails irreducible interval-valued probabilities, not point values, making a determinate ratio impossible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.In cases such as Prisoner and Gatecrasher, the likelihood ratio of naked statistical evidence can take a range of different values depending on the background information taken into account.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Because the likelihood ratio varies with background information, it cannot be fixed at any single value.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    Because the likelihood ratio varies with background information, it cannot be fi...Hacking's frequentist constraint holds that probability statements require a wel...In cases such as Prisoner and Gatecrasher, the likelihood ratio of naked statist...Keynes's weight-of-evidence concept shows that low evidential weight entails irr...
    +3 moreShow less
    The likelihood ratio requires specifying a precise alternative hypothesis, but n...Walley's imprecise probability framework formalizes this: where evidence underde...When the reference class is underdetermined, the likelihood ratio inherits that ...

    Similar

    In cases such as Prisoner and Gatecrasher, the likelihood ratio of nak...89%Under plausible assumptions, the likelihood ratio of naked statistical...88%The likelihood ratio of naked statistical evidence is significantly gr...88%If the likelihood ratio is greater than one, the evidence does provide...81%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: legal-probabilism
    View source passageHide passage
    Fifth, another line of response for legal probabilists is to concede that the paradoxes of naked statistical evidence demonstrate the inadequacy of simple probabilistic thresholds as proof standards (Urbaniak 2019). Instead of the posterior probability of liability, a number of scholars have focused on the likelihood ratio \(P(E\pmid H)/P(E \pmid H')\). Their argument is that, even though naked statistical evidence can support a high posterior probability of liability, the likelihood ratio of th
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit