This AIC looks way more fun than the other AIC for (soft toy) model selection.
![](https://i0.wp.com/luis.apiolaza.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/1703189294319.jpeg?resize=676%2C508&ssl=1)
Evolving notes, images and sounds by Luis Apiolaza
This AIC looks way more fun than the other AIC for (soft toy) model selection.
There is no logical warrant for considering an event known to occur in a given hypothesis, even if infrequently, as disproving the hypothesis.
Joseph Berkson in “Tests of significance considered as evidence”. Journal of the American Statistical Association 37: 325-335.
Over the birdsite dumpster fire. Emily Harvey was asking:
do you know of any good guidelines/advice for what one should do to sense check and make sure they understand any data before using it?
I replied the following:
Typically, I might be very familiar with the type of data and its variables (if it is one of my trials) or chat/email multiple times with the owner of the dataset(s) so I can check that:
Of course these questions are dataset dependent and need to be adapted to each separate situation. Finally: Do results make any sense?
Null hypotheses of no difference are usually known to be false before the data are collected … when they are, their rejection or acceptance simply reflects the size of the sample and the power of the test, and is not a contribution to science
Savage 1957 cited by Nelder 1999 “From Statistics to Statistical Science”. The Statistician 48(2): 257-269.
The combination of some data and an aching desire for an answer does not ensure that a reasonable answer can be extracted from a given body of data.
John W Tukey in Sunset Salvo. 1986. The American Statistician 40(1): 72-76.
© 2024 Palimpsest
Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑