You can enhance your privacy when browsing and posting to this forum by using the free and open source Tor Browser and posting as a guest (using a fake e-mail address such as nobody@nowhere.com) or registering with a free, anonymous ProtonMail e-mail account. Registered users can exchange private messages with other registered users and receive notifications.
You cannot reasonably expect, in this forum, a primer on discriminate analysis, likelihood ratios or bayesian probabilities.
More succinct questions would be in order.
For basic information, of which there is sometimes a lot, you can refer to any advanced statistics texts or treatises. However, many find it easier to learn about statistics in a classroom with other students vs. self study.
r
Thank-you Mr. Nelson for your comments. Based on your response, I guess there is no way to discuss this in laymans terms.
Posted by: raymond.nelson Posted on: Oct 24th, 2007 at 3:58pm
You cannot reasonably expect, in this forum, a primer on discriminate analysis, likelihood ratios or bayesian probabilities.
More succinct questions would be in order.
For basic information, of which there is sometimes a lot, you can refer to any advanced statistics texts or treatises. However, many find it easier to learn about statistics in a classroom with other students vs. self study.
r
Posted by: nopolycop Posted on: Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:53pm
Is it my understanding that the polygraph examiner himself determines how much variance in the chart readings in order to determine deception or no deception? I ask this based on the following lineini Mr. Hont's study regarding countermeasures:
"Followng the data collection, the examiner ran the CPS discriminant analysis classification software . . . . Participants who produced probabilities of trthfulness of .7 or greater were told they passed and were given the movie pass bonus."