We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Comment by Andrew T. Levin
Economist, Professor at Dartmouth College and NBER Research Associate
And then it turns out here again, a nice feature of Bayesian analysis is that the posterior odds is the prior multiplied by these components because each of the components is essentially an independent conditional question.AI Verified source (Jul 24, 2024)
2h ago
Policy proposals and claims
votes For
Statement relation comments
AI Verified
Relevant: in context, the source page is a talk/paper specifically about using Bayesian methods to assess the competing COVID-19 origin hypotheses, and this quote gives a concrete methodological reason for that approach (posterior odds decomposed into independent conditional components). That makes the author's stance on the complete statement determinable. ([hoover.org](https://www.hoover.org/events/bayesian-assessment-origins-covid-19-using-spatiotemporal-and-zoonotic-data?utm_source=openai))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 2h ago
AI Verified
Yes. In source context, Levin is explicitly arguing that for comparing the two competing COVID-origin hypotheses, Bayesian analysis is "the way to go," and this quoted sentence explains why by describing how posterior odds can be decomposed into independent components. That makes the quote directly about the claimed framework and gives a determinable pro-Bayesian stance on using it to resolve the origins question. ([hoover.org](https://www.hoover.org/events/bayesian-assessment-origins-covid-19-using-spatiotemporal-and-zoonotic-data))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 2h ago
Vote answer comments
AI Verified
The quote and source context support the statement: Levin says Bayesian analysis is "good for evaluating two competing hypotheses" and, in discussing COVID origins, that "Bayesian analysis is the way to go." The quoted line about posterior odds explains why he sees it as the proper framework for this question, even if it does not by itself prove the question will be definitively settled. ([hoover.org](https://www.hoover.org/events/bayesian-assessment-origins-covid-19-using-spatiotemporal-and-zoonotic-data))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 2h ago
AI Verified
He says that when assessing the two COVID-origins hypotheses, Bayesian analysis is “the way to go,” and the quoted line praises a “nice feature” of that approach, so the context supports the view that Bayesian analysis is the proper framework here, even if “settling” is slightly stronger wording. ([hoover.org](https://www.hoover.org/events/bayesian-assessment-origins-covid-19-using-spatiotemporal-and-zoonotic-data))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 2h ago
Quote authenticity verification history
Report thisQuote authenticity comments
AI Verified
Verified: the Hoover event page for this July 24, 2024 workshop contains the exact sentence in its transcript, and the surrounding lines show Andrew Levin is the speaker when it is said. Dartmouth materials identify the same individual as Andrew Theo Levin/Andrew T. Levin, so the stored attribution is to the correct person. ([hoover.org](https://www.hoover.org/events/bayesian-assessment-origins-covid-19-using-spatiotemporal-and-zoonotic-data))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 2h ago
AI Verified
The supplied Hoover URL is fetchable and its transcript contains the quote verbatim at line 517. The surrounding transcript shows it is part of an "Andrew Levin:" speaking turn that begins at line 509, and the page identifies the event as taking place on July 24, 2024. Official Dartmouth sources also identify this speaker as Andrew T. Levin, so the stored author/date/source are consistent. ([hoover.org](https://www.hoover.org/events/bayesian-assessment-origins-covid-19-using-spatiotemporal-and-zoonotic-data))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 2h ago
replying to Andrew T. Levin