A seemingly trivial result, that I haven’t seen posted anywhere in this form, that I could find. It simply shows that we expect evidence to increase the posterior probability of the true hypothesis.
Is it the proof or result which is supposed to be new? I would be really surprised if there were no proofs that Bayesian estimators are consistent and concentrate on the true posterior result.
The proof is so trivial that it must have been proved before, but I spent two hours searching for the result and couldn’t find it (it’s very plausible I just lack the correct search terms). The closest I could find were things like the Bernstein–von Mises theorem, but that’s not exactly it.
Is it the proof or result which is supposed to be new? I would be really surprised if there were no proofs that Bayesian estimators are consistent and concentrate on the true posterior result.
The proof is so trivial that it must have been proved before, but I spent two hours searching for the result and couldn’t find it (it’s very plausible I just lack the correct search terms). The closest I could find were things like the Bernstein–von Mises theorem, but that’s not exactly it.