Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2202.03819

Mr. Bayes and the classics: a suggested interpretation

Abstract

The main hypothesis about Thomas Bayes's intentions to write his famous Essay on probability is that he wanted to refute the arguments of David Hume against the reliability of the occurrence of miracles, published in 1748. In this paper we argue that it was not Bayes's intention to rebut Hume but that his interest on the "inverse problem" came about as result of his study of the second edition of Abraham De Moivre's book, The Doctrine of Chances, published in 1738. A possible communication of Bayes's breakthrough might have annoyed De Moivre, leading to a response written for Bayes in the third edition of De Moivre's book, published in 1756. Among other points, the response claims that De Moivre was the first to solve the mentioned inverse problem. Under this perspective Richard Price's letter, written as preface to Bayes's essay, has a new interpretation, appearing also as a defense of Bayes premiership on a satisfactory or proper solution.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Marcio Alves Diniz, David Richard Bellhouse. 2022-02-08. Mr. Bayes and the classics: a suggested interpretation. https://arxiv.org/abs/2202.03819

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

See You at the Posterior Line: Learning Bayesian Modeling Through a Car Racing Game

We present an interactive classroom activity designed to address a central challenge in teaching introductory Bayesian statistics: how to formalize subjective knowledge and available information into prior distributions and then update them with empirical data. Role-playing as data analysts for a racing team, students evaluate candidate tires by converting qualitative engineering reports into prior distributions, collecting primary data via a virtual racing game, and using a Beta-Binomial model to inform team strategy. This discovery-based exercise allows small groups to observe directly how different prior choices and sample data jointly shape posterior inference. Student feedback ($n=32$) highlights high enjoyment, engagement and improved conceptual clarity. Open-access materials to implement the activity are provided, alongside recommendations for adapting it to other teaching contexts.

stat.OT

Why is Regularization Underused? An Empirical Study on Trust and Adoption of Statistical Methods

Statistical practice does not automatically follow methodological innovation. Regularization methods, widely advocated to reduce overfitting and stabilize inference, are readily available in modern software, but are not consistently used by data analysts. We investigate this implementation gap in a large-scale empirical study of trust in, and acceptance of, regularization techniques, based on $N = 606$ data analysts. Drawing on measurement frameworks from technology acceptance research, we survey practitioners and embed a randomized experiment to test whether written recommendation of regularization methods increases trust or intended use. We find no evidence of such an effect. Instead, adoption intentions are strongly associated with analysts' perceptions of ease of implementation and practical benefit, such as improved bias control or interpretability. Perceived social norms also emerge as a central driver. These results indicate that uptake of statistical methodology depends less on formal recommendations than on usability, perceived utility, and community practice.

stat.OT

Exact analysis of a split--merge queue with latent Erlang-factor dependent subtask times

This paper studies a two-server split--merge queue with positively dependent subtask service times modeled through a latent-factor bivariate Erlang construction. An exact characterization of the split--merge completion time is obtained, including explicit formulas for its first two moments and the resulting mean waiting time. Under fixed marginal service-time distributions, independence is shown to stochastically increase the completion time and hence overestimate mean waiting time. Numerical illustrations show that this benchmark gap can be substantial.

stat.OT