Accepted lack of confidence
[This article was first published on Xi'an's Og » R, and kindly contributed to R-bloggers]. (You can report issue about the content on this page here)
Want to share your content on R-bloggers? click here if you have a blog, or here if you don't.
Want to share your content on R-bloggers? click here if you have a blog, or here if you don't.
I just got the following email from PNAS about our Lack of confidence in ABC model choice.
Editor's Remarks to Author: both referees now find the manuscript acceptable for publication as do I. Each suggests small changes which I encourage the authors to make prior to having the manuscript go into production. Congratulations on an interesting and provocative paper.
This is terrific news (and my first true paper in PNAS)! The small changes are indeed very minor and involve (a) reverting to the inclusion of the above graph comparing 1000 with 50,000 importance sampling simulation in the large population genetic experiment (b) mentioning that the ABC-based model choice actually produced the proper conclusion in those population genetic experiments. We now have to work hard to complete our paper with Jean-Michel Marin, Natesh Pillai and Judith Rousseau towards a partial resolution of the issues raised in this paper.
Filed under: R, Statistics, University life Tagged: ABC, Bayes factors, Bayesian model choice, importance sampling, PNAS
To leave a comment for the author, please follow the link and comment on their blog: Xi'an's Og » R.
R-bloggers.com offers daily e-mail updates about R news and tutorials about learning R and many other topics. Click here if you're looking to post or find an R/data-science job.
Want to share your content on R-bloggers? click here if you have a blog, or here if you don't.