alt Hacker NewsFrequentist confidence intervals as generally interpreted are not even compatible with the likelihood principle. There's really not much of a proper foundation for that interpretation of the "numerical values".
Frequentist confidence intervals as generally interpreted are not even compatible with the likelihood principle. There's really not much of a proper foundation for that interpretation of the "numerical values".
What does “as generally interpreted” mean? There is one valid way to interpret confidence intervals. The point is that it’s not based on a posterior probability and there is no prior probability there either.