Pages / #probability / #statistics
Bayes' theorem
Bayes' theorem says how much to believe something after new evidence: your prior belief, reweighed by how well the evidence fits it.
1,000 people, one positive testInteractive
- In words
- posterior = likelihood × prior ÷ evidence
- Read to the Royal Society
- 23 December 1763
- Author
- Thomas Bayes, edited by Richard Price
- Found again by
- Laplace, 1774
- SEP example
- 95% / 90% test, 3% base rate: 0.227
- Also called
- Bayes' law, Bayes' rule
The same test as a tree
In words
Prior, likelihood, posterior
4/4
Bayes' theorem is a simple formula for conditional probabilities 1. It inverts them: from how often a cause produces an effect, it finds how likely the cause is once you see the effect 2. In words, posterior = likelihood × prior ÷ evidence 3. Learning becomes belief revision, where a prior probability is replaced by a posterior that takes in the new information 4.
4 of 4 quotes found in their sources
-
Bayes' Theorem (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) plato.stanford.edu
Bayes' Theorem is a simple mathematical formula used for calculating conditional probabilities.
Quote found in the source -
Bayes' theorem (Wikipedia) en.wikipedia.org
gives a mathematical rule for inverting conditional probabilities, allowing the probability of a cause to be found given its effect
Quote found in the source -
Bayes' theorem (Wikipedia) en.wikipedia.org
posterior = likelihood × prior ÷ evidence
Quote found in the source -
Bayes' Theorem (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) plato.stanford.edu
a "prior" subjective probability P is replaced by a "posterior" probability Q that incorporates newly acquired information
Quote found in the source
Why most positives are false alarms
5/5
When a disease is rare, the healthy far outnumber the sick, so even a good test can produce more false positives than true ones 1. The Stanford Encyclopedia's example: a test that catches 95% of heroin users and clears 90% of non-users, where 3% use, leaves a positive tester with a 0.227 chance of being a user 23; the low base rate swamps the positive result 4. Overlooking that is the base rate fallacy 5. Compare the false positives of a Bloom filter.
5 of 5 quotes found in their sources
-
Base rate fallacy (Wikipedia) en.wikipedia.org
This paradox describes situations where there are more false positive test results than true positives
Quote found in the source -
Bayes' Theorem: examples, tables, and proof sketches (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) plato.stanford.edu
correctly identifies users 95% of the time and correctly identifies nonusers 90% of the time
Quote found in the source -
Bayes' Theorem: examples, tables, and proof sketches (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) plato.stanford.edu
0.227 exceeds P(H) = 0.03
Quote found in the source -
Bayes' Theorem: examples, tables, and proof sketches (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) plato.stanford.edu
the low base rate swamps the positive test result
Quote found in the source -
Base rate fallacy (Wikipedia) en.wikipedia.org
people tend to ignore the base rate (e.g., general prevalence) in favor of the information pertaining only to a specific case
Quote found in the source
Bayes, Price and Laplace
3/3
Thomas Bayes never published it. His friend Richard Price edited the manuscript for two years and had it read at the Royal Society on 23 December 1763 1; the essay appeared that year, two years after its author's death 2. Pierre-Simon Laplace reached and extended the same results in 1774, apparently unaware of Bayes 3.
3 of 3 quotes found in their sources
-
Bayes' theorem (Wikipedia) en.wikipedia.org
Price significantly edited the unpublished manuscript for two years before sending it to a friend who read it aloud at the Royal Society on 23 December 1763
Quote found in the source -
An Essay Towards Solving a Problem in the Doctrine of Chances (Wikipedia) en.wikipedia.org
published in 1763, two years after its author's death
Quote found in the source -
Bayes' theorem (Wikipedia) en.wikipedia.org
He reproduced and extended Bayes's results in 1774, apparently unaware of Bayes's work
Quote found in the source