Probability
. | Estimate
. | Interpretation
. | Evidence
. |
---|---|---|---|

P(T) | 0.32 | prior of T | posterior of like-with-like model |

P(∼T) | 0.68 | prior of not T | 1 − prior |

P(E1|T) | 0.7 | strongly consistent | X-ray picture of B-form supports helix via theory |

P(E1|∼T) | 0.7 | strongly consistent | Like-with-like model is also a helix |

P(E2|T) | 0.7 | strongly consistent | 34 Å crystallographic repeat (B form X-ray picture) |

P(E2|∼T) | 0.3 | strongly inconsistent | Like-with-like model did not give a 34 Å repeat |

P(E3|T) | 0.7 | strongly consistent | bond lengths fit |

P(E3|∼T) | 0.3 | strongly inconsistent | Like-with-like bond lengths did not fit |

P(E4|T) | 0.7 | strongly consistent | C2 symmetry of structure |

P(E4|∼T) | 0.3 | strongly inconsistent | Like-with-like model lacked C2 symmetry |

P(E5|T) | 0.7 | strongly consistent | obeys Chargaff’s rules |

P(E5|∼T) | 0.3 | strongly inconsistent | Like-with-like inconsistent with Chargaff rules |

P(E6|T) | 0.7 | strongly consistent | hydrogen bonding of bases correct |

P(E6|∼T) | 0.3 | strongly inconsistent | Like-with-like model has hydrogen bonding wrong |

P(E7|T) | 0.6 | weakly consistent | mechanism for replication suggested |

P(E7|∼T) | 0.6 | weakly consistent | Like-with-like also gave mechanism for replication |

P(T|E1–E7) | 0.97 | Confirm | % change = +203.1, LR = 69.2 |

Probability
. | Estimate
. | Interpretation
. | Evidence
. |
---|---|---|---|

P(T) | 0.32 | prior of T | posterior of like-with-like model |

P(∼T) | 0.68 | prior of not T | 1 − prior |

P(E1|T) | 0.7 | strongly consistent | X-ray picture of B-form supports helix via theory |

P(E1|∼T) | 0.7 | strongly consistent | Like-with-like model is also a helix |

P(E2|T) | 0.7 | strongly consistent | 34 Å crystallographic repeat (B form X-ray picture) |

P(E2|∼T) | 0.3 | strongly inconsistent | Like-with-like model did not give a 34 Å repeat |

P(E3|T) | 0.7 | strongly consistent | bond lengths fit |

P(E3|∼T) | 0.3 | strongly inconsistent | Like-with-like bond lengths did not fit |

P(E4|T) | 0.7 | strongly consistent | C2 symmetry of structure |

P(E4|∼T) | 0.3 | strongly inconsistent | Like-with-like model lacked C2 symmetry |

P(E5|T) | 0.7 | strongly consistent | obeys Chargaff’s rules |

P(E5|∼T) | 0.3 | strongly inconsistent | Like-with-like inconsistent with Chargaff rules |

P(E6|T) | 0.7 | strongly consistent | hydrogen bonding of bases correct |

P(E6|∼T) | 0.3 | strongly inconsistent | Like-with-like model has hydrogen bonding wrong |

P(E7|T) | 0.6 | weakly consistent | mechanism for replication suggested |

P(E7|∼T) | 0.6 | weakly consistent | Like-with-like also gave mechanism for replication |

P(T|E1–E7) | 0.97 | Confirm | % change = +203.1, LR = 69.2 |

This site uses cookies. By continuing to use our website, you are agreeing to our privacy policy. No content on this site may be used to train artificial intelligence systems without permission in writing from the MIT Press.