The impact of macroparasites on their hosts is proportional to the number of parasites per host, or parasite abundance. Abundance values are count data, i.e. integers ranging from 0 to some maximum number, depending on the host–parasite system. When using parasite abundance as a predictor in statistical analysis, a common approach is to bin values, i.e. group hosts into infection categories based on abundance, and test for differences in some response variable (e.g. a host trait) among these categories. There are well-documented pitfalls associated with this approach. Here, I use a literature review to show that binning abundance values for analysis has been used in one-third of studies published in parasitological journals over the past 15 years, and half of the studies in ecological and behavioural journals, often without any justification. Binning abundance data into arbitrary categories has been much more common among studies using experimental infections than among those using naturally infected hosts. I then use simulated data to demonstrate that true and significant relationships between parasite abundance and host traits can be missed when abundance values are binned for analysis, and vice versa that when there is no underlying relationship between abundance and host traits, analysis of binned data can create a spurious one. This holds regardless of the prevalence of infection or the level of parasite aggregation in a host sample. These findings argue strongly for the practice of binning abundance data as a predictor variable to be abandoned in favour of more appropriate analytical approaches.

Rigorous methods have recently been developed for statistical inference of Malmquist productivity indices (MPIs) in the context of nonparametric frontier estimation, including the new central limit theorems, estimation of the bias, standard errors and the corresponding confidence intervals. The goal of this study is to briefly overview these methods and consider a few possible improvements of their implementation in relatively small samples. Our Monte-Carlo simulations confirmed that the method from Simar et al. (2023) is useful for the simple mean and aggregate MPI in relatively small sample sizes (e.g., up to around 50) and especially for large dimensions. Interestingly, we also find that the “data sharpening” method from Nguyen et al. (2022), which helps in improving the approximation in the context of efficiency is not needed in the context of estimation of productivity indices. Finally, we provide an empirical illustration of the differences across the existing methods.

English courts have long professed to apply a “presumption of similarity” when faced with inconclusive foreign law evidence. However, its precise nature and implications remain unclear. Here, I argue that no true “presumption” exists. Instead, courts should only draw an inference, that English and foreign courts would render similar rulings on the same facts, when that conclusion can be reliably drawn. Understanding the “presumption” as a reliable inference helps facilitate the accurate prediction of foreign decisions, resolves various controversies surrounding its “use” in civil proceedings and does not render the proof of foreign law unpredictable or inconvenient in practice.

When we want to compute the probability of a query from a probabilistic answer set program, some parts of a program may not influence the probability of a query, but they impact on the size of the grounding. Identifying and removing them is crucial to speed up the computation. Algorithms for SLG resolution offer the possibility of returning the residual program which can be used for computing answer sets for normal programs that do have a total well-founded model. The residual program does not contain the parts of the program that do not influence the probability. In this paper, we propose to exploit the residual program for performing inference. Empirical results on graph datasets show that the approach leads to significantly faster inference. The paper has been accepted at the ICLP2024 conference and under consideration in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).

An information-theoretic framework is used to analyze the knowledge content in multivariate cross classified data. Several related measures based directly on the information concept are proposed: the knowledge content (S) of a cross classification, its terseness (Zeta), and the separability (GammaX) of one variable, given all others. Exemplary applications are presented which illustrate the solutions obtained where classical analysis is unsatisfactory, such as optimal grouping, the analysis of very skew tables, or the interpretation of well-known paradoxes. Further, the separability suggests a solution for the classic problem of inductive inference which is independent of sample size.

Educational assessment concerns inference about students' knowledge, skills, and accomplishments. Because data are never so comprehensive and unequivocal as to ensure certitude, test theory evolved in part to address questions of weight, coverage, and import of data. The resulting concepts and techniques can be viewed as applications of more general principles for inference in the presence of uncertainty. Issues of evidence and inference in educational assessment are discussed from this perspective.

We study the problem of identifying a small number $k\sim n^\theta$, $0\lt \theta \lt 1$, of infected individuals within a large population of size $n$ by testing groups of individuals simultaneously. All tests are conducted concurrently. The goal is to minimise the total number of tests required. In this paper, we make the (realistic) assumption that tests are noisy, that is, that a group that contains an infected individual may return a negative test result or one that does not contain an infected individual may return a positive test result with a certain probability. The noise need not be symmetric. We develop an algorithm called SPARC that correctly identifies the set of infected individuals up to $o(k)$ errors with high probability with the asymptotically minimum number of tests. Additionally, we develop an algorithm called SPEX that exactly identifies the set of infected individuals w.h.p. with a number of tests that match the information-theoretic lower bound for the constant column design, a powerful and well-studied test design.

Collecting network data directly from network members can be challenging. One alternative involves inferring a network from observed groups, for example, inferring a network of scientific collaboration from researchers’ observed paper authorships. In this paper, I explore when an unobserved undirected network of interest can accurately be inferred from observed groups. The analysis uses simulations to experimentally manipulate the structure of the unobserved network to be inferred, the number of groups observed, the extent to which the observed groups correspond to cliques in the unobserved network, and the method used to draw inferences. I find that when a small number of groups are observed, an unobserved network can be accurately inferred using a simple unweighted two-mode projection, provided that each group’s membership closely corresponds to a clique in the unobserved network. In contrast, when a large number of groups are observed, an unobserved network can be accurately inferred using a statistical backbone extraction model, even if the groups’ memberships are mostly random. These findings offer guidance for researchers seeking to indirectly measure a network of interest using observations of groups.

When using dyadic data (i.e., data indexed by pairs of units), researchers typically assume a linear model, estimate it using Ordinary Least Squares, and conduct inference using “dyadic-robust” variance estimators. The latter assumes that dyads are uncorrelated if they do not share a common unit (e.g., if the same individual is not present in both pairs of data). We show that this assumption does not hold in many empirical applications because indirect links may exist due to network connections, generating correlated outcomes. Hence, “dyadic-robust” estimators can be biased in such situations. We develop a consistent variance estimator for such contexts by leveraging results in network statistics. Our estimator has good finite-sample properties in simulations, while allowing for decay in spillover effects. We illustrate our message with an application to politicians’ voting behavior when they are seating neighbors in the European Parliament.

We argue that stereotypes associated with concepts like he-said–she-said, conspiracy theory, sexual harassment, and those expressed by paradigmatic slurs provide “normative inference tickets”: conceptual permissions to automatic, largely unreflective normative conclusions. These “mental shortcuts” are underwritten by associated stereotypes. Because stereotypes admit of exceptions, normative inference tickets are highly flexible and productive, but also liable to create serious epistemic and moral harms. Epistemically, many are unreliable, yielding false beliefs which resist counterexample; morally, many perpetuate bigotry and oppression. Still, some normative inference tickets, like some activated by sexual harassment, constitute genuine moral and hermeneutical advances. For example, our framework helps explain Miranda Fricker's notion of “hermeneutical lacunae”: what early victims of “sexual harassment” – as well as their harassers – lacked before the term was coined was a communal normative inference ticket – one that could take us, collectively, from “this is happening” to “this is wrong.”