I think that reading this and thinking it over helped me figure out a confusing math error I was making. Thank you!
Normally, to calculate the odds of a false negative, I would need the test accuracy, but I would also need the base rate.
I.E, If a test for the presence or absence of colonization is 99% accurate, and the base rate for evidence of colonization is present in 1% of stars, and my test is negative, then I can compute the odds of a false negative.
However, in this case, I was attempting to determine “Given that our tests aren’t perfectly accurate, what if the base rate of colonization isn’t 0%?” and while that may be a valid question, I was using the wrong math to work on it, and it was leading me to conclusions that didn’t make a shred of sense.
I think that reading this and thinking it over helped me figure out a confusing math error I was making. Thank you!
Normally, to calculate the odds of a false negative, I would need the test accuracy, but I would also need the base rate.
I.E, If a test for the presence or absence of colonization is 99% accurate, and the base rate for evidence of colonization is present in 1% of stars, and my test is negative, then I can compute the odds of a false negative.
However, in this case, I was attempting to determine “Given that our tests aren’t perfectly accurate, what if the base rate of colonization isn’t 0%?” and while that may be a valid question, I was using the wrong math to work on it, and it was leading me to conclusions that didn’t make a shred of sense.