Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Types of Hypothesis Testing01:11

Types of Hypothesis Testing

27.5K
There are three types of hypothesis tests: right-tailed, left-tailed, and two-tailed.
When the null and alternative hypotheses are stated, it is observed that the null hypothesis is a neutral statement against which the alternative hypothesis is tested. The alternative hypothesis is a claim that instead has a certain direction. If the null hypothesis claims that p = 0.5, the alternative hypothesis would be an opposing statement to this and can be put either p > 0.5, p < 0.5, or p...
27.5K
Statistical Hypothesis Testing01:16

Statistical Hypothesis Testing

4.9K
Hypothesis testing is a critical statistical procedure facilitating informed, evidence-based decisions. It begins with a hypothesis, which is a tentative explanation, or a prediction about a population parameter. This hypothesis can be either a null hypothesis (H0), indicating no effect or difference, or an alternative hypothesis (Ha), suggesting an effect or difference.
Statistical significance measures the probability that an observed result occurred by chance. If this probability, known as...
4.9K
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing01:13

Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing

457
Hypothesis testing is a fundamental statistical tool that begins with the assumption that the null hypothesis H0 is true. During this process, two types of errors can occur: Type I and Type II. A Type I error refers to the incorrect rejection of a true null hypothesis, while a Type II error involves the failure to reject a false null hypothesis.
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5%...
457
Errors In Hypothesis Tests01:14

Errors In Hypothesis Tests

5.5K
When performing a hypothesis test, there are four possible outcomes depending on the actual truth (or falseness) of the null hypothesis and the decision to reject or not.
5.5K
Decision Making: Traditional Method01:14

Decision Making: Traditional Method

4.9K
The process of hypothesis testing based on the traditional method includes calculating the critical value, testing the value of the test statistic using the sample data, and interpreting these values.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...
4.9K
Decision Making: P-value Method01:09

Decision Making: P-value Method

6.5K
The process of hypothesis testing based on the P-value method includes calculating the P- value using the sample data and interpreting it.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim  is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses:  a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can...
6.5K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Exploring the use of AI-generated counterfactual chest X-rays to enhance diagnostic learning in medical education.

BMC medical education·2026
Same author

A Bayesian network approach to evaluating footwear evidence.

Forensic science international. Synergy·2026
Same author

Canonicalizing Zeta Generators: Genus Zero and Genus One.

Communications in mathematical physics·2025
Same author

Case Order Effects in Legal Decision-Making.

Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)·2025
Same author

Belief updating in the face of misinformation: The role of source reliability.

Cognition·2025
Same author

Forensic footwear examination: A systematic review of the existing literature.

Forensic science international·2024

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Nov 27, 2025

Impact Assessment of Repeated Exposure of Organotypic 3D Bronchial and Nasal Tissue Culture Models to Whole Cigarette Smoke
09:50

Impact Assessment of Repeated Exposure of Organotypic 3D Bronchial and Nasal Tissue Culture Models to Whole Cigarette Smoke

Published on: February 12, 2015

11.4K

Ranking the Impact of Different Tests on a Hypothesis in a Bayesian Network.

Leila Schneps1, Richard Overill2, David Lagnado3

  • 1Institut de Mathématiques de Jussieu, Paris 75013, France.

Entropy (Basel, Switzerland)
|December 3, 2020
PubMed
Summary

Selecting optimal forensic tests is crucial due to resource limits. This study uses Bayesian networks to evaluate test impact, finding Kullback-Leibler divergence best for maximizing influence on criminal case hypotheses.

Keywords:
Bayesian networksKullback–Leibler divergenceimpact measurestornado method

More Related Videos

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments
08:12

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments

Published on: March 1, 2022

2.8K
The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups
14:14

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups

Published on: May 13, 2022

6.2K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Nov 27, 2025

Impact Assessment of Repeated Exposure of Organotypic 3D Bronchial and Nasal Tissue Culture Models to Whole Cigarette Smoke
09:50

Impact Assessment of Repeated Exposure of Organotypic 3D Bronchial and Nasal Tissue Culture Models to Whole Cigarette Smoke

Published on: February 12, 2015

11.4K
A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments
08:12

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments

Published on: March 1, 2022

2.8K
The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups
14:14

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups

Published on: May 13, 2022

6.2K

Area of Science:

  • Computational forensic science
  • Decision theory in evidence analysis
  • Bayesian networks in criminal investigations

Background:

  • Forensic evidence testing faces limitations: time, cost, and mutually exclusive test options.
  • Efficient selection of high-impact tests is essential for effective criminal case resolution.
  • Current methods may not optimally prioritize tests based on their influence on case outcomes.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To develop and evaluate methods for selecting forensic tests with maximal impact on a main hypothesis in criminal cases.
  • To apply these methods to a real-world digital crime investigation.
  • To identify the most effective metric for evaluating test impact within a Bayesian network framework.

Main Methods:

  • Bayesian networks were employed to model the relationship between a main hypothesis, evidence, and potential tests.
  • Three distinct methods were utilized to quantify the impact of each test on the main hypothesis.
  • The methods were validated using data from an actual digital crime case provided by Hong Kong police.

Main Results:

  • The study successfully applied Bayesian networks to model a criminal case scenario.
  • Quantitative measures of test impact were derived, allowing for comparative analysis.
  • Kullback-Leibler divergence emerged as the superior method for impact assessment.

Conclusions:

  • Kullback-Leibler divergence is the optimal method for selecting forensic tests that significantly influence the outcome of criminal investigations.
  • The Bayesian network approach provides a robust framework for optimizing evidence testing strategies.
  • This methodology can enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of forensic analysis in digital crime cases.