Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: AdmSmith

Since 90% confidence isn’t enough, the 10% confidence that it isn’t so will have to do, eh? ;’)


58 posted on 07/21/2010 4:14:50 PM PDT by SunkenCiv ("Fools learn from experience. I prefer to learn from the experience of others." -- Otto von Bismarck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]


To: SunkenCiv

The laymen usually misunderstand how little “90%” is as a confidence level - and some traders with fear masterfully abuse this ignorance. 90% vs 10% is not that “qualitatively” far from 50% vs 50% - and one can transform one to the other by a “slight” pressure in the methodology and the formulae. If you want to be scientifically confident about a conclusion, you should really demand 99.9% or more. And it’s actually not that hard to obtain such stronger evidence assuming that your hypothesis is actually correct and the “signal” exists.
http://motls.blogspot.com/2010/03/defending-statistical-methods.html


59 posted on 07/22/2010 12:09:26 AM PDT by AdmSmith (GCTGATATGTCTATGATTACTCAT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson