I'm not sure I can follow you here, but I guess this is the wrong place for this debate. As a co-worker of the authors of that paper, and after having discussed it with them several times, I got convinced that their argument is correct. (Intuitively, it looks wrong, of course. The fact that a statistician's intuition gives you a wrong idea here was actuallt the motivation to write a paper on this seemingly simple point.)
I understand that you see a flaw in their argument but I guess it would take a rather lengthy post to point it out, and SeqAnswers may not be the right forum for such a discussion, so let's better leave it at that.
I understand that you see a flaw in their argument but I guess it would take a rather lengthy post to point it out, and SeqAnswers may not be the right forum for such a discussion, so let's better leave it at that.
Comment