|
| Nicole
JinnTo:
Micha
|
|
 |
|
 |
Nicole JinnTo: Michael Lew: No, I do *not* think that the likelihood is excatly what is needed for assessment of evidence. To clarify, a likelihood function *fixes* the observed data set, and is a function of the unknown parameter(s) of interest. Hence, I see the likelihood as mainly focusing on the *observed* data at hand; whereas severity (in my understanding) *also* looks at cases that were *not* (directly) observed! Simply put, I think that the relationship between severity and likelihoods is *not* as close as what you propose.
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(VISITOR) AUTHOR'S NAME
Mma
MESSAGE TIMESTAMP
17 december 2014, 00:34:04
AUTHOR'S IP LOGGED
62.210.78.179
|
|
|
|
