“Generally, the likelihood function is the joint density (or probability function for discrete variables), de fined as a function of the unknown parameters…” (math stuff omitted)
“This estimator is rarely available, since the second derivatives of the log-likelihood function are often complicated nonlinear functions of the data whose exact expected values will be unknown. The estimator is
positive de finite provided θ(0) is identi ed, and therefore usually positive de finite in fi nite samples.”
I just got thinking. This makes perfect sense, I understand what’s being said. But how many assumptions about prior knowledge does it take to get a likelihood of 0,5 of someone understanding all of this? Regular reader ‘Plamus’ knows this stuff, I’m sure about that, but is he even in the majority or not of my readers? How many such sentences would I meet if I started reading a book on histology? (I know the answer to that and my respect for doctors went up after that.)
It’s not the marginal piece of information that’s a problem. It’s all the stuff you need to know and remember in order to understand the marginal piece of information.