The validity of posterior probability statements follows from probability calculus when the likelihood is the density of the observations. To investigate other cases, a second, more intuitive definition of validity is introduced, based on coverage of posterior sets. This notion of validity suggests that the likelihood must be the density of a statistic, not necessarily sufficient, for posterior probability statements to be valid. A convenient numerical method is proposed to invalidate the use of certain likelihoods for Bayesian analysis. Integrated, marginal, and conditional likelihoods, derived to avoid nuisance parameters, are also discussed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Monahan et al. (1992) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: