 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 Next: Combination of results from
 Up: Poisson model: dependence on
 Previous: Poisson model: dependence on
     Contents 
Dependence on priors
The results of Sections ![[*]](file:/usr/lib/latex2html/icons/crossref.png) and
 
and ![[*]](file:/usr/lib/latex2html/icons/crossref.png) were obtained using a 
uniform prior. One may worry how much the result changes 
if different priors are used in the analysis. 
Bearing in mind the rule of coherence, we are clearly 
interested only in 
reasonable9.1 priors.
 were obtained using a 
uniform prior. One may worry how much the result changes 
if different priors are used in the analysis. 
Bearing in mind the rule of coherence, we are clearly 
interested only in 
reasonable9.1 priors.
In frontier physics 
the choice of 
 is often not reasonable. 
For example, searching for monopoles, one does not
believe that
 is often not reasonable. 
For example, searching for monopoles, one does not
believe that 
 and
 and  are equally possible. 
Realistically, one would expect to observe, with the planned experiment 
and running time,
 are equally possible. 
Realistically, one would expect to observe, with the planned experiment 
and running time, 
 monopoles, if they exist at all. 
We  follow the same arguments of Section
 monopoles, if they exist at all. 
We  follow the same arguments of Section ![[*]](file:/usr/lib/latex2html/icons/crossref.png) (negative neutrino mass), modelling the prior beliefs
of a community of rational people who have 
planned and run the experiment. 
For reasons of mathematical convenience, we model
(negative neutrino mass), modelling the prior beliefs
of a community of rational people who have 
planned and run the experiment. 
For reasons of mathematical convenience, we model 
 with an exponential, but, extrapolating the results
of Section
 with an exponential, but, extrapolating the results
of Section ![[*]](file:/usr/lib/latex2html/icons/crossref.png) , it is easy to understand that 
the exact function is not really crucial for the final result.
, it is easy to understand that 
the exact function is not really crucial for the final result. 
The function
|  | (9.1) | 
 
with
may be well suited to the case: the highest beliefs 
are for small values of  , but also values
 up to 30 or 50 would not be 
really surprising. 
We obtain the following results:
, but also values
 up to 30 or 50 would not be 
really surprising. 
We obtain the following results: 
|  |  |  | (9.2) | 
|  |  |  | (9.3) | 
| E ![$\displaystyle [\lambda]$](img807.png) |  |  |  | 
|  |  |  |  | 
|  |  |  with 95% probability  | (9.4) | 
 
The result is very stable. Changing 
E![$ _\circ[\lambda]$](img1300.png) from `
 from ` ' to 10 has only a 
10% effect on the upper limit. As far as the scientific conclusions
are concerned, the two limit are identical. 
For this reason one should not 
worry about using a uniform prior, and complicate one's life 
to model a more realistic 
prior.
' to 10 has only a 
10% effect on the upper limit. As far as the scientific conclusions
are concerned, the two limit are identical. 
For this reason one should not 
worry about using a uniform prior, and complicate one's life 
to model a more realistic 
prior.
As an exercise, we can extend this result to a generic expected 
value of events, still sticking to the exponential:
which has an expected value  
 . 
The uniform distribution is recovered 
for
. 
The uniform distribution is recovered 
for 
 . We get:
. We get:
The upper limit, at a probability level  , becomes:
, becomes: 
|  | (9.5) | 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 Next: Combination of results from
 Up: Poisson model: dependence on
 Previous: Poisson model: dependence on
     Contents 
Giulio D'Agostini
2003-05-15