The Bayes Factor Reversal Paradox

Fuente: arXiv
Enregistré dans:
Détails bibliographiques
Auteur principal: Lovric, Miodrag M.
Format: Preprint
Publié: 2025
Sujets:
Accès en ligne:
Tags: Ajouter un tag
Pas de tags, Soyez le premier à ajouter un tag!
_version_ 1866918219394056192
author Lovric, Miodrag M.
author_facet Lovric, Miodrag M.
contents In 1957, Lindley published "A statistical paradox" in Biometrika, revealing a fundamental conflict between frequentist and Bayesian inference as sample size approaches infinity. We present a new paradox of a different kind: a conflict within Bayesian inference itself. In the normal model with known variance, we prove that for any two-sided statistically significant result at the 0.05 level there exist prior variances such that the Bayes factor indicates evidence for the alternative with one choice while indicating evidence for the null with another. Thus, the same data, testing the same hypothesis, can yield opposite conclusions depending solely on prior choice. This answers Robert's 2016 call to investigate the impact of the prior scale on Bayes factors and formalises his concern that this choice involves arbitrariness to a high degree. Unlike the Jeffreys-Lindley paradox, which requires sample size approaching infinity, the paradox we identify occurs with realistic sample sizes.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2511_22152
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle The Bayes Factor Reversal Paradox
Lovric, Miodrag M.
Methodology
62F15, 62F03
In 1957, Lindley published "A statistical paradox" in Biometrika, revealing a fundamental conflict between frequentist and Bayesian inference as sample size approaches infinity. We present a new paradox of a different kind: a conflict within Bayesian inference itself. In the normal model with known variance, we prove that for any two-sided statistically significant result at the 0.05 level there exist prior variances such that the Bayes factor indicates evidence for the alternative with one choice while indicating evidence for the null with another. Thus, the same data, testing the same hypothesis, can yield opposite conclusions depending solely on prior choice. This answers Robert's 2016 call to investigate the impact of the prior scale on Bayes factors and formalises his concern that this choice involves arbitrariness to a high degree. Unlike the Jeffreys-Lindley paradox, which requires sample size approaching infinity, the paradox we identify occurs with realistic sample sizes.
title The Bayes Factor Reversal Paradox
topic Methodology
62F15, 62F03
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.22152