Statistical Power And The False Discovery Rate

Brad Klingbenberg has an insightful article on false discovery rate:

A good frequentist would never interpret a p-value as the probability that the null hypothesis is true. But it can be enormously tempting. And despite all your efforts to the contrary it is likely that many of your colleagues don’t appreciate the distinction.

So, really, how wrong is it to treat a p-value as (one minus) the posterior probability that the null hypothesis is true? In general, it’s bad. But in some cases a p-value is a very good approximation to a posterior probability. Here we examine that approximation in a common testing scenario.

Check it out for sure.

Related Posts

Principal Component Analysis With Faces

Mic at The Beginner Programmer shows us how to creepy PCA diagrams with human faces: PCA looks for a new the reference system to describe your data. This new reference system is designed in such a way to maximize the variance of the data across the new axis. The first principal component accounts for as […]

Read More

Using Uncertainty For Model Interpretation

Yoel Zeldes and Inbar Naor explain how uncertainty can help you understand your models better: One prominent example is that of high risk applications. Let’s say you’re building a model that helps doctors decide on the preferred treatment for patients. In this case we should not only care about the accuracy of the model, but […]

Read More


May 2018
« Apr Jun »