Skip to main content

Bayes' Rule - James V. Stone ***

Of all the areas of mathematics, probability is arguably the most intriguing to the non-mathematician, and this is particularly the case with Bayesian analysis, which can be delightfully counter-intuitive. However, the more complex aspects can be tricky to get your head around, so I was delighted to have the chance to read this book, subtitled 'a tutorial introduction to Bayesian analysis.'

I need to say straight away that this isn't really a popular science title, and the author is very clear about this - it's a kind of textbook lite - but if you have found out a bit about Bayes this book is an opportunity to dive into it a little deeper without taking on the full rigour of a textbook approach. Why should you care? Bayes gives us a mechanism that enables us to do things like go from a known piece of information like 'what's the probability of a symptom given a disease' to estimate a much more interesting unknown like 'what's the probability of the disease given a symptom' - an extremely powerful mechanism.

James Stone does his best to accommodate us ordinary folk. The book opens well, apart from a bizarrely heavy smattering of references on page 1, with a gentle introduction, and keeps the mood light after the classic disease application by looking for a mechanism of determining whether some said 'four candles' or 'fork handles' in the Two Ronnies style. If you are prepared to make an effort, for most of us probably a considerable effort, you will go on to pick up a lot more about using Bayes than you already knew (if you aren't a mathematician).

It is rather unfortunate for the general reader, though, that the book obeys the rules of the textbook rather than a popular science exposition. This comes across in unnecessary use of terminology - defining things that, frankly we don't need to know - and in rapidly moving to using symbols in equations, where they are rarely necessary at this level and all they do is put readers off. I suspect the moment that Stone introduced the Greek letter theta (θ) he made things ten times harder - unless you do this kind of thing every day, suddenly the text gets far less readable - the eyes bounce off it.

Even though I enjoyed the fork handles, I also thought the choice of examples could have been better. It was okay to use disease and symptom once, as it's an important application, but most of us rarely have to deal with this kind of situation and it would have been better to use more personally relevant applications. It was also unfortunate that when explaining random variables Stone chose a coin which is 90% likely to be heads and 10% likely to be tails - there is too much baggage attached to coins being 50:50. It would have been less confusing to have something that we might encounter (a scratch card, say) that is likely to be one value 90% of the time and the other 10%.

If you make it to the final chapter you are rewarded with a very readable, if too brief, introduction to the distinction between Bayesian and frequentist approaches, and just a touch of the mind bending capabilities of Bayesian thinking. With a bit more of this contextual material throughout the experience would have been gentler and more enjoyable - but even as a closer to the book it provides interesting material.

Don't expect, then that this book will make fun, popular science bedtime reading. It's not that kind of exercise. However, if you are prepared to overcome the onslaught of thetas and don't mind reading some statements several times to get what's being said, it is an excellent way to expand a vague understanding into a more sound knowledge of the basic mechanics of Bayesian analysis.


Paperback 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

Buy direct from the author: Click here
See one of the mind-bending implications of Bayes' rule in our feature.
Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Patricia Fara - Four Way Interview

Patricia Fara lectures in the history of science at Cambridge University, where she is a Fellow of Clare College. She was the President of the British Society for the History of Science (2016-18) and her prize-winning book, Science: A Four Thousand Year History (OUP, 2009), has been translated into nine languages. An experienced public lecturer, Patricia Fara appears regularly in TV documentaries and radio programmes. She also contributes articles and reviews to many popular magazines and journals, including History Today, BBC History, New Scientist, Nature and the Times Literary SupplementHer new book is Erasmus Darwin.

Why history of science?
I read physics at university, but half-way through the course I realised that had been a big mistake. Although I relished the intellectual challenge, I was bored by the long hours spent lining up recalcitrant instruments in dusty laboratories. Why was nobody encouraging us to think about the big questions – What is gravity? Does quantum mechani…

The Idea of the Brain: Matthew Cobb *****

Matthew Cobb is one of those people that you can’t help but admire but also secretly hate just a little bit for being so awesome. He is professor for zoology at the University of Manchester with a sizable teaching load that he apparently masters with consummate skill. He’s a scientific researcher, who researches the sense of smell of fruit fly maggots; I kid you not!  He’s also an attentive and loving family father but he still finds time and energy to write brilliant history of science books, three to date. His first, The Egg and Sperm Race, describes the search for the secret of human reproduction in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries and is one of my favourite history of science books, on the period. His second, Life’s Greatest Secret is a monster, both in scope and detail, description of the hunt to decipher the structure and function of DNA that along the way demolishes a whole boatload of modern history of science myths. The most recent, and the subject of this review, is

The Search for Life on Mars - Elizabeth Howell and Nicholas Booth ***

From the book’s enticing subtitle, ‘The Greatest Scientific Detective Story of All Time’, I was expecting something rather different. I thought the authors would kick off by introducing the suspects (the various forms life might take on Mars, either now or in the past) and the kind of telltale traces they might leave, followed by a chronological account of the detectives (i.e. scientists) searching for those traces, ruling out certain suspects and focusing on others, turning up unexpected new clues, and so on. But the book is nothing like that. Continuing with the fiction analogy, this isn’t a novel so much as a collection of short stories – eleven self-contained chapters, each with its own set of protagonists, suspects and clues.

Some of the chapters work better than others. I found the first three – which despite their early placement cover NASA’s most recent Mars missions – the most irritating. For one thing, they unfold in a way that’s at odds with the cerebral ‘detective story’ na…