Exoplaneteers Keep Overestimating Sigma Significances

Fuente: arXiv
Salvato in:
Dettagli Bibliografici
Autori principali: Kipping, David, Benneke, Björn
Natura: Preprint
Pubblicazione: 2025
Soggetti:
Accesso online:
Tags: Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
_version_ 1866908413101867008
author Kipping, David
Benneke, Björn
author_facet Kipping, David
Benneke, Björn
contents Astronomers, and in particular exoplaneteers, have a curious habit of expressing Bayes factors as frequentist sigma values. This is of course completely unnecessary and arguably rather ill-advised. Regardless, the practice is common - especially in the detection claims of chemical species within exoplanet atmospheres. The current canonical conversion strategy stems from a statistics paper from Sellke et al. (2001), who derived an upper bound on the Bayes factor between the test and null hypotheses, as a function of the $p$-value (or number of sigmas, $n_σ$). A common practice within the exoplanet atmosphere community is to numerically invert this formula, going from a Bayes factor to $n_σ$. This goes back to Benneke & Seager (2013) -- a highly cited paper that introduced Bayesian model comparison as a means of inferring the presence of specific chemical species -- in an attempt to calibrate the Bayes factors from their technique for a community that in 2013 was more familiar with frequentist sigma significances. However, as originally noted by Sellke et al. (2001), the conversion only provides an upper limit on $n_σ$, with the true value generally being lower. This can result in inflations of claimed detection significances, and this note strongly urges the community to stop converting to $n_σ$ at all and simply stick with Bayes factors.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2506_05392
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Exoplaneteers Keep Overestimating Sigma Significances
Kipping, David
Benneke, Björn
Instrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics
Earth and Planetary Astrophysics
Astronomers, and in particular exoplaneteers, have a curious habit of expressing Bayes factors as frequentist sigma values. This is of course completely unnecessary and arguably rather ill-advised. Regardless, the practice is common - especially in the detection claims of chemical species within exoplanet atmospheres. The current canonical conversion strategy stems from a statistics paper from Sellke et al. (2001), who derived an upper bound on the Bayes factor between the test and null hypotheses, as a function of the $p$-value (or number of sigmas, $n_σ$). A common practice within the exoplanet atmosphere community is to numerically invert this formula, going from a Bayes factor to $n_σ$. This goes back to Benneke & Seager (2013) -- a highly cited paper that introduced Bayesian model comparison as a means of inferring the presence of specific chemical species -- in an attempt to calibrate the Bayes factors from their technique for a community that in 2013 was more familiar with frequentist sigma significances. However, as originally noted by Sellke et al. (2001), the conversion only provides an upper limit on $n_σ$, with the true value generally being lower. This can result in inflations of claimed detection significances, and this note strongly urges the community to stop converting to $n_σ$ at all and simply stick with Bayes factors.
title Exoplaneteers Keep Overestimating Sigma Significances
topic Instrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics
Earth and Planetary Astrophysics
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.05392