The only time I can think of this being meaningful is in determining what size
sample to draw. If we don't have any prior information about what the
proportion of events in a population have a particular characteristic (the
probability of a characteristic), then we assume the worse-case (widest
variance) of 50%.
"W. D. Allen Sr." wrote:
> It's been years since I was in school so I do not remember if I have the
> following statement correct.
>
> Pascal said that if we know absolutely nothing
> about the probability of occurrence of an event
> then our best estimate for the probability of
> occurrence of that event is one half.
>
> Do I have it correctly? Any guidance on a source reference would be greatly
> appreciated!
>
> Thanks,
>
> WDA
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> end
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
