Professor Terman’s Determinism: A Rejoinder

Rejoinder to Professor Teller

At the outset of his comments Professor Teller expresses disquiet at what seems to him my claiming to have a rule which is capable of automatically generating the hypothesis to be adopted when given nothing but the experimental data. Such a claim would indeed be quite preposterous since everybody knows that there are no clear-cut principles for the production of hypotheses, but that these are s...

Rejoinder: On Professor McCutcheon’s (Un)Critical Caretaking

NOT EVERYTHING THAT Russell McCutcheon wrote about my article is inaccurate or simply false, but much of it is. Bolstered by his mis-reading of broad swaths of the article, Professor McCutcheon has done little more than insist, “No, this is not what I meant at all!” Alas, as Michel Foucault (and so many others) has pointed out, an author is typically the last to dictate the meaning of his or he...

Rejoinder

We thank the editor Professor David Steinberg for organizing this stimulating discussion. We are also grateful to all the discussants for their constructive comments about the method proposed in our paper (denoted as QZW hereafter). Profile monitoring is a relatively new research area; but, it has a profound application background (cf., Wang and Tsung 2005, Woodall et al. 2004). Due to the fact...

Rejoinder

Rejoinder

Regarding Jennifer’s criticism of the “independence” assumption in expression (2) of the paper, we agree that this is surely not true though it may be roughly true. However, the “correlation” calculation in (2) is a bit more complicated than it initially appears in that the calculation is with respect to a uniform distribution over say, the locations in unit i. In fact, the randomness arises fr...