If you find any of this useful, please consider donating via PayPal to help keep this site going.

Email news@statisticool.com to sign up to receive news and updates

Frequentism Criticism of Bayesian Criticism of Frequentism


Here is something like a proof without (a lot of) words:

Remember that the Strong Law of Large Numbers (SLLN) says that it is almost certain that between the mth and nth observations in a group of length n, the relative frequency of Heads will remain near the fixed value p, whatever p may be, and be within the interval [p-e, p+e], for any e > 0, provided that m and n are sufficiently large numbers. That is,

P(Heads) in [p-e, p+e] > 1 - 1/(m*e2)

Keep in mind that for large n almost all priors are irrelevant compared to the likelihood. If priors are irrelevant for large n, then they are still irrelevant for small n, even if they have more pull. Although, for small n, as you may have expected, most frequentist and even Bayesian analyses (almost any type of analysis honestly) are of dubious value.

I personally think a more interesting discussion in statistics is parametric vs. nonparametric.

Thanks for reading!

Please anonymously VOTE on the content you have just read:


If you enjoyed any of my content, please consider supporting it in a variety of ways:

AFFILIATE LINK DISCLOSURE: Some links included on this page may be affiliate links. If you purchase a product or service with the affiliate link provided I may receive a small commission (at no additional charge to you). Thank you for the support!