# "From the summary: > the model is saying that t..."

https://arbital.com/p/59q

by Eric Rogstad Jul 10 2016

From the summary:

the model is saying that there are a whole bunch of different places where some model is saying

The model is saying that some model is saying? Is this how this sentence was meant to read, or is there one model too many in there?

Can we just replace the following:

According to the frequentist interpretation, the model is saying that there are a whole bunch of different places where some model is saying "the coin is 70% likely to be heads," and the model is true if, in 70% of those different places, the coin is heads.

with this:

According to the frequentist interpretation, there are a whole bunch of different places where the model is saying "the coin is 70% likely to be heads," and the model is true if, in 70% of those different places, the coin is heads.

?

Nate Soares

No. edited for clarity, see if that helps.

Hmm…

1) It seems weird to say that the model claims that there are a bunch of other models/events. It's saying that within some class, a certain result happens a certain fraction of the time, so it only relies on there being multiple events implicitly.

2) It doesn't seem necessary to claim that there are a "whole bunch" of other models/events -- there only have to be as many as the denominator of the probability stated as a reduced fraction, right?

3) I'm confused about the claim that there are other models. The rest of the text on the page seems to require that there is a class of events for the frequentist interpretation. If I flip a coin a bunch of times, under the frequentist interpretation, do I have a different model for each flip?