Peter Bowyer wrote:
> Please show me where I outlined such an equation? Come on, I don't
> mind being told I'm wrong when I am, but this is going a bit far.....
> I did refer solely to the Bayesian capabilities of SA without
> mentioning that it does other things as well, but believe me, I'm very
> much aware of that.
The impression I got was that you weren't as you focused solely on the
Bayesian capability of SA to the exclusion of all others. This was on the
tail of Marc's message where he mentioned SA in general and not just its
Bayesian capacity. For all you know he might not even be using the classifier
so to focus on it seemed odd in such a context and the presumption that SA
only did Bayes and nother other tests. However it fit better if someone were
coming from the perspective that SA was just a Bayes test and nothing more.
My apologies.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
