TL;DR
This paper examines how the choice of uniform versus logarithmic priors affects Bayesian evidence and model comparison for the tensor-to-scalar ratio and neutrino masses using Planck and neutrino oscillation data.
Contribution
It provides a detailed analysis of prior effects on Bayesian evidence, highlighting the invariance of evidence to lower bounds and quantifying Occam penalties with Kullback-Leibler divergence.
Findings
Uniform prior on r disfavors the r-extension model (odds 1:20).
Logarithmic prior makes the base LCDM and extended models equally likely.
Favorability of neutrino mass models varies significantly with prior choice.
Abstract
We review the effect that the choice of a uniform or logarithmic prior has on the Bayesian evidence and hence on Bayesian model comparisons when data provide only a one-sided bound on a parameter. We investigate two particular examples: the tensor-to-scalar ratio of primordial perturbations and the mass of individual neutrinos , using the cosmic microwave background temperature and polarisation data from Planck 2018 and the NuFIT 5.0 data from neutrino oscillation experiments. We argue that the Kullback-Leibler divergence, also called the relative entropy, mathematically quantifies the Occam penalty. We further show how the Bayesian evidence stays invariant upon changing the lower prior bound of an upper constrained parameter. While a uniform prior on the tensor-to-scalar ratio disfavours the -extension compared to the base LCDM model with odds of about 1:20, switching to…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
