“Not Only Defended But Also Applied”: The Perceived Absurdity of Bayesian Inference
From MaRDI portal
Cites work
- Errors of Probability in Historical Context
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3132222 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3223982 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3349081 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3054843 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3059214 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3061365 (Why is no real title available?)
- Is Bayes posterior just quick and dirty confidence?
- Natural induction: An objective bayesian approach
- Probability and Random Variables
- Rejoinder to discussion of ‘Philosophy and the practice of Bayesian statistics’
- The search for certainty. On the clash of science and philosophy of probability
- Why Isn't Everyone a Bayesian?
Cited in
(6)- Prototypes, exemplars and the response scaling parameter: a Bayes factor perspective
- A POSTERIORI RATEMAKING WITH PANEL DATA
- Comment: Bayesian Ideas Reemerged in the 1950s
- Discussion: Bayesian Methods: Applied? Yes. Philosophical Defense? In Flux
- "Not only defended but also applied": The perceived absurdity of Bayesian inference
- Bayesian issues in the 1950s: an episode involving Karl Popper and Jimmie Savage
This page was built for publication: “Not Only Defended But Also Applied”: The Perceived Absurdity of Bayesian Inference
Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q5877094)
