Summary. The paper discusses the problem of a fallible auditor who may classify incorrect values as ‘correct’, or vice versa. To detect these mistakes, a sample of the auditor's classifications is checked again, now by an infallible expert. From the classifications of both the auditor and the expert the error rate in the population is estimated. We show that classical confidence intervals for the error rate are of limited practical use. Instead, we propose and implement a Bayesian approach.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Raats et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: