How Likelihoodists Should (and Should Not) Respond to Borel’s Paradox∗ Greg Gandenberger March 14, 2014 Note: This document is a work in progress. Please do not cite it without

First Page		Document Content
Date: 2014-03-14 22:30:09 Statistical inference Design of experiments Likelihood function Likelihood principle Normal distribution Statistical hypothesis testing Probability distribution Null hypothesis Maximum likelihood Statistics Hypothesis testing Estimation theory		How Likelihoodists Should (and Should Not) Respond to Borel’s Paradox∗ Greg Gandenberger March 14, 2014 Note: This document is a work in progress. Please do not cite it without Add to Reading List Source URL: gandenberger.org Download Document from Source Website File Size: 364,36 KB Share Document on Facebook

	The failure of null hypothesis significance testing when studying incremental changes, and what to do about it∗ Andrew Gelman† 3 JulAbstract DocID: 1uUlT - View Document
	Appendix 5 Computing the Power of Statistical Tests There are two types of errors that one can make when performing a statistical test. A false positive (a Type I error) occurs when the null hypothesis is rejected when DocID: 1u93f - View Document
	DISCUSSION NOTE Null-hypothesis significance testing of word frequencies: a follow-up on Kilgarriff* STEFAN TH. GRIES DocID: 1tyPe - View Document
	Psychological Bulletin I960. Vol. 57, No. S, THE FALLACY OF THE NULL-HYPOTHESIS SIGNIFICANCE TEST WILLIAM W. ROZEBOOM DocID: 1sYOy - View Document
	Results of Pharmacophore hypothesis generated using training set against LTA4H inhibitors HYPOTHESIS NUMBER TOTAL COST DIFFERENCE OF TOTAL COST AND NULL COST RMS DEVIATION FEATURES TEST SET CORRELATION 1 53.62 1 DocID: 1rycJ - View Document