Table as published

TABLE 1
Bayes Factor Analysis of Hominid Cranial Capacity (Data From Bailey & Geary, 2009)
Model \(R^2\) \(B_{m0}\) \(B_{mf}\)
\(\cal{M}_{f}\) Local+Global+Parasites+Density 0.7109 3.54 × 1041 1.00
\(\cal{M}_{1}\) Local+Global+Parasites 0.5670 5.56 × 1027 1.57 × 10−14
\(\cal{M}_{2}\) Local+Global+Density 0.7072 1.56 × 1042 4.41
\(\cal{M}_{3}\) Local+Parasites+Density 0.6303 3.82 × 1033 1.08 × 10−8
\(\cal{M}_{4}\) Global+Parasites+Density 0.7109 4.59 × 1042 1.30 × 101
\(\cal{M}_{5}\) Local+Global 0.5199 1.02 × 1025 2.88 × 10−17
\(\cal{M}_{6}\) Local+Parasites 0.2429 1.23 × 108 3.47 × 10−34
\(\cal{M}_{7}\) Local+Density 0.6258 1.84 × 1034 5.20 × 10−8
\(\cal{M}_{8}\) Global+Parasites 0.5642 4.02 × 1028 1.14 × 10−13
\(\cal{M}_{9}\) Global+Density 0.7069 2.17 × 1043 6.10 × 101
\(\cal{M}_{10}\) Parasites+Density 0.6298 4.60 × 1034 1.30 × 10−7
\(\cal{M}_{11}\) Local 0.0910 2.20 × 102 6.21 × 10−40
\(\cal{M}_{12}\) Global 0.5049 1.10 × 1025 3.11 × 10−17
\(\cal{M}_{13}\) Parasites 0.2221 1.28 × 108 3.62 × 10−34
\(\cal{M}_{14}\) Density 0.6244 2.29 × 1035 6.47 × 10−7
Note. Local = local climate; Global = global temperature; Parasites = parasite load; Density = population density.

Some checking

I wanted to compare the results to the 2012 code, to see whether the differences could be accounted for by integration tweaks.

Apparently not. The differences are very small.

Table as it should be

In the table below, I have computed the values using the BayesFactor package. I have highlighted the background color of the cells based on their original table’s deviation from this table; redder cells are “worse”. As you can see, the \(\cal{M}_13\) row seems to be the main error, but there are still minor deviations elsewhere.

TABLE 1
Bayes Factor Analysis of Hominid Cranial Capacity (Data From Bailey & Geary, 2009)
Model \(R^2\) \(B_{m0}\) \(B_{mf}\)
\(\cal{M}_{f}\) Local+Global+Parasites+Density 0.7109 3.56 × 1041 1.00
\(\cal{M}_{1}\) Local+Global+Parasites 0.5670 5.60 × 1027 1.58 × 10−14
\(\cal{M}_{2}\) Local+Global+Density 0.7072 1.58 × 1042 4.43
\(\cal{M}_{3}\) Local+Parasites+Density 0.6303 3.79 × 1033 1.07 × 10−8
\(\cal{M}_{4}\) Global+Parasites+Density 0.7109 4.59 × 1042 1.29 × 101
\(\cal{M}_{5}\) Local+Global 0.5199 1.01 × 1025 2.84 × 10−17
\(\cal{M}_{6}\) Local+Parasites 0.2429 1.23 × 108 3.45 × 10−34
\(\cal{M}_{7}\) Local+Density 0.6258 1.84 × 1034 5.18 × 10−8
\(\cal{M}_{8}\) Global+Parasites 0.5642 4.02 × 1028 1.13 × 10−13
\(\cal{M}_{9}\) Global+Density 0.7069 2.19 × 1043 6.15 × 101
\(\cal{M}_{10}\) Parasites+Density 0.6298 4.60 × 1034 1.29 × 10−7
\(\cal{M}_{11}\) Local 0.0910 2.21 × 102 6.21 × 10−40
\(\cal{M}_{12}\) Global 0.5049 1.10 × 1025 3.09 × 10−17
\(\cal{M}_{13}\) Parasites 0.2221 1.46 × 108 4.09 × 10−34
\(\cal{M}_{14}\) Density 0.6244 2.27 × 1035 6.39 × 10−7
Note. Local = local climate; Global = global temperature; Parasites = parasite load; Density = population density.

Rounded \(R^2\)?

As a check, I wanted to see if the smaller differences could be due to using the rounded \(R^2\) values in the table. Maybe we wanted people to be able to type the value from the table into a calculator and get the Bayes factor from the table.

TABLE 1
Bayes Factor Analysis of Hominid Cranial Capacity (Data From Bailey & Geary, 2009)
Model \(R^2\) \(B_{m0}\) \(B_{mf}\)
\(\cal{M}_{f}\) Local+Global+Parasites+Density 0.7109 3.54 × 1041 1.00
\(\cal{M}_{1}\) Local+Global+Parasites 0.5670 5.56 × 1027 1.57 × 10−14
\(\cal{M}_{2}\) Local+Global+Density 0.7072 1.56 × 1042 4.40
\(\cal{M}_{3}\) Local+Parasites+Density 0.6303 3.82 × 1033 1.08 × 10−8
\(\cal{M}_{4}\) Global+Parasites+Density 0.7109 4.59 × 1042 1.30 × 101
\(\cal{M}_{5}\) Local+Global 0.5199 1.02 × 1025 2.88 × 10−17
\(\cal{M}_{6}\) Local+Parasites 0.2429 1.23 × 108 3.46 × 10−34
\(\cal{M}_{7}\) Local+Density 0.6258 1.84 × 1034 5.18 × 10−8
\(\cal{M}_{8}\) Global+Parasites 0.5642 4.02 × 1028 1.13 × 10−13
\(\cal{M}_{9}\) Global+Density 0.7069 2.17 × 1043 6.12 × 101
\(\cal{M}_{10}\) Parasites+Density 0.6298 4.60 × 1034 1.30 × 10−7
\(\cal{M}_{11}\) Local 0.0910 2.20 × 102 6.21 × 10−40
\(\cal{M}_{12}\) Global 0.5049 1.10 × 1025 3.10 × 10−17
\(\cal{M}_{13}\) Parasites 0.2221 1.45 × 108 4.09 × 10−34
\(\cal{M}_{14}\) Density 0.6244 2.29 × 1035 6.45 × 10−7
Note. Local = local climate; Global = global temperature; Parasites = parasite load; Density = population density.

Using rounded \(R^2\) seems to account for the smaller differences in the table.