Difference between revisions of "Talk:2059: Modified Bayes' Theorem"
TobyBartels (talk | contribs) (Removed paragraph that makes no sense.) |
|||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
But there is more wrong right now. Look at a typical Wikipedia article, the Math-extension should be used for formulas but not in the floating text. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:03, 15 October 2018 (UTC) | But there is more wrong right now. Look at a typical Wikipedia article, the Math-extension should be used for formulas but not in the floating text. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:03, 15 October 2018 (UTC) | ||
: Credit for a good explanation though. It made perfect sense to me, even though I didn't understand it. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.167.42|162.158.167.42]] 04:14, 16 October 2018 (UTC) | : Credit for a good explanation though. It made perfect sense to me, even though I didn't understand it. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.167.42|162.158.167.42]] 04:14, 16 October 2018 (UTC) | ||
+ | |||
+ | I removed this, because it makes no sense: | ||
+ | |||
+ | : As an equation, the rewritten form makes no sense. <math>P(H \mid X) = P(H)(1-P(C)) + P(H \mid X)P(C)</math> is strangely self-referential and reduces to the piecewise equation <math>\begin{cases}P(H \mid X) = P(H) & P(C) \neq 1 \\ 0 = 0 & P(C) = 1 \end{cases}</math>. However, the Modified Bayes Theorem includes an extra variable not listed in the conditioning, so a person with an AI background might understand that Randal was trying to write an expression for updating <math>P(H \mid X)</math> with knowledge of <math>C</math> i.e. <math>P(H \mid X,C)</math>, the belief in the hypothesis given the observation <math>X</math> and the confidence that you were applying Bayes' theorem correctly <math>C</math>, for which the expression <math>P(H \mid X,C) = P(H)(1-P(C)) + P(H \mid X)P(C)</math> makes some intuitive sense. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Between removing it and posting here, I think that I've figured out what it's saying. But it comes down to criticizing a mistake made in an earlier edit by the same editor, so I'll just fix that mistake instead. | ||
+ | |||
+ | —[[User:TobyBartels|TobyBartels]] ([[User talk:TobyBartels|talk]]) 13:03, 16 October 2018 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:03, 16 October 2018
Right now the layout is awful:
- "If the..."
- should look like this:
- "If P(C)=1 the..."
But there is more wrong right now. Look at a typical Wikipedia article, the Math-extension should be used for formulas but not in the floating text. --Dgbrt (talk) 20:03, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
- Credit for a good explanation though. It made perfect sense to me, even though I didn't understand it. 162.158.167.42 04:14, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
I removed this, because it makes no sense:
- As an equation, the rewritten form makes no sense. is strangely self-referential and reduces to the piecewise equation . However, the Modified Bayes Theorem includes an extra variable not listed in the conditioning, so a person with an AI background might understand that Randal was trying to write an expression for updating with knowledge of i.e. , the belief in the hypothesis given the observation and the confidence that you were applying Bayes' theorem correctly , for which the expression makes some intuitive sense.
Between removing it and posting here, I think that I've figured out what it's saying. But it comes down to criticizing a mistake made in an earlier edit by the same editor, so I'll just fix that mistake instead.
—TobyBartels (talk) 13:03, 16 October 2018 (UTC)