search

tom-hc-park / MSc-RA-Bayesian-evidence-synthesis

Research Project at M.Sc. Statistics at University of British Columbia
4 stars 0 forks source link

Questions about some of the 3rd comments #9

Open tom-hc-park opened 4 years ago

tom-hc-park commented 4 years ago

Dear Prof. Gustafson,

I would like to ask you a few questions about the comments you gave to me. I've edited the report following the most of the comments so far but I have a few comments left where I need to double check the meaning of the comments before I finish editing.

  1. Screen Shot 2020-04-07 at 5 24 19 PM

I am not sure what does this comment mean. Does it mean that it is recommended to have a simpler version of figure which shows the general form of Bayes theorem, written in equation (1)?

the equation (1) is as below.

Screen Shot 2020-04-07 at 5 24 01 PM

  1. Also, I am a little bit not sure about the meaning of this comment:
Screen Shot 2020-04-07 at 5 23 54 PM

I guess that let \theta denote the all unknown values, and say, y denote all the related data so that I could write the equation (1) in a more general format?

Thanks for your concern.

See you tomorrow.

Best,

tom-hc-park commented 4 years ago

I pushed the edited version which includes my understanding of the comments here... I would like to hear any opinion about the edits tomorrow...

paulgstf commented 4 years ago

I'm suggesting that the figure is good as it is, but the equation could be revised to be more in line with the figure .... it's true that you ultimately might be most interested in p(O_1:T | data), but you end up getting that as a marginal from p(O_1:T and other unobserved stuff | data), so maybe equation 1 should reflect this... And then on the wording, you need priors and/or data to inform all the unobserved stuff, not just the target parameter ... again you will focus in on the target as a last step.