147,957
edits
Citation bot (talk  contribs) m (Alter: url.  You can use this bot yourself. Report bugs here. Activated by User:Nemo bis  via #UCB_webform) 
m (Open access bot: hdl, doi added to citation with #oabot.) 

==Background==
The general approach of fiducial inference was proposed by [[Ronald Fisher]].<ref>{{cite journal  last1 = Fisher  first1 = R. A.  year = 1935  title = The fiducial argument in statistical inference  journal = Annals of Eugenics  volume = 5  issue = 4 pages = 391–398  doi=10.1111/j.14691809.1935.tb02120.x hdl = 2440/15222  hdlaccess = free }}</ref><ref>[http://www.hss.cmu.edu/philosophy/seidenfeld/relating%20to%20Fisher/Fisher's%20Fiducial%20Argument%20and%20Bayes%20Theorem.pdf R. A. Fisher's Fiducial Argument and Bayes' Theorem by Teddy Seidenfeld]</ref> Here "fiducial" comes from the Latin for faith. Fiducial inference can be interpreted as an attempt to perform [[inverse probability]] without calling on [[prior probability distribution]]s.<ref>Quenouille (1958), Chapter 6</ref> Fiducial inference quickly attracted controversy and was never widely accepted.<ref>Neyman, Jerzy. "Note on an article by Sir Ronald Fisher." Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological) (1956): 288–294.</ref> Indeed, counterexamples to the claims of Fisher for fiducial inference were soon published.{{Citation neededdate=June 2011}} These counterexamples cast doubt on the coherence of "fiducial inference" as a system of [[statistical inference]] or [[inductive logic]]. Other studies showed that, where the steps of fiducial inference are said to lead to "fiducial probabilities" (or "fiducial distributions"), these probabilities lack the property of additivity, and so cannot constitute a [[probability measure]].{{Citation neededdate=June 2011}}
The concept of fiducial inference can be outlined by comparing its treatment of the problem of [[interval estimation]] in relation to other modes of statistical inference.
pages=369–387
jstor=2246073
doiaccess=free
}} (page 381)
</ref> and, also writing to Barnard, Fisher complained that his theory seemed to have only "an asymptotic approach to intelligibility".<ref name=Z/> Later Fisher confessed that "I don't understand yet what fiducial probability does. We shall have to live with it a long time before we know what it's doing for us. But it should not be ignored just because we don't yet have a clear interpretation".<ref name=Z/>
*Young, G. A., Smith, R. L. (2005) ''Essentials of Statistical Inference'', CUP. {{ISBN0521839718}}
* {{cite journal  last1 = Fraser  first1 = D. A. S.  year = 1961  title = The fiducial method and invariance  url =  journal = Biometrika  volume = 48  issue = 3/4 pages = 261–80  doi=10.2307/2332749 jstor = 2332749 }}
* {{cite journal  last1 = Fraser  first1 = D. A. S.  year = 1961  title = On fiducial inference  url =  journal = Annals of Mathematical Statistics  volume = 32  issue = 3 pages = 661–676  doi=10.1214/aoms/1177704962 doiaccess = free }}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Fiducial Inference}}
