Difference between revisions of "Talk:ERF for Frambozadrine in rats"

From Testiwiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(a discussion on method selection started)
 
Line 11: Line 11:
 
|Argumentation =
 
|Argumentation =
 
{{defend|#1: |Method A is the best.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)}}<br>
 
{{defend|#1: |Method A is the best.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)}}<br>
{{attack_invalid|#2: |Method B is the best.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)}}
+
{{attack|#2: |Method B is the best.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)}}
 
:{{defend|#5: |B recovers the observed uncertainty the best when inversion works out.|by Roger Cooke, added by --[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)}}
 
:{{defend|#5: |B recovers the observed uncertainty the best when inversion works out.|by Roger Cooke, added by --[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)}}
:{{attack|#6: |Probabilistic inversion is a demanding method and does not converge more often than others.|by Roger Cooke, added by --[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)}}
+
:{{attack_invalid|#6: |Probabilistic inversion is a demanding method and does not converge more often than others.|by Roger Cooke, added by --[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)}}
 +
::{{attack|#(7): |Jouni didn't say it quite right, PI always converges, but it converges to a SOLUTION only if the problem is feasible. When the PI problem is not feasible, it converges to a 'minimally painful' answer. In this case the PI was feasible for the threshold model.|--[[User:Roger|Roger]] 16:25, 24 October 2007 (EEST)}}
 
{{attack|#3: |Method C is the best.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)}}<br>
 
{{attack|#3: |Method C is the best.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)}}<br>
 
{{attack|#4: |Method D is the best.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)}}
 
{{attack|#4: |Method D is the best.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)}}
 
}}
 
}}

Revision as of 13:25, 24 October 2007

Which method is the best for dose-response estimation?

How to read discussions

Statements:

Resolution: Resolution not yet found.

(A stable resolution, when found, should be updated to the main page.)

Argumentation:

#1: : Method A is the best. --Jouni 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)
#2: : Method B is the best. --Jouni 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)

#5: : B recovers the observed uncertainty the best when inversion works out. by Roger Cooke, added by --Jouni 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)
#6: Probabilistic inversion is a demanding method and does not converge more often than others. by Roger Cooke, added by --Jouni 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)
#(7): : Jouni didn't say it quite right, PI always converges, but it converges to a SOLUTION only if the problem is feasible. When the PI problem is not feasible, it converges to a 'minimally painful' answer. In this case the PI was feasible for the threshold model. --Roger 16:25, 24 October 2007 (EEST)

#3: : Method C is the best. --Jouni 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)
#4: : Method D is the best. --Jouni 14:26, 24 October 2007 (EEST)