Frequentist interpretation — where it appears
Named by 3 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
Twenty intervals and one expected miss
The 95% belongs to the procedure, not to the interval in front of you. Twenty intervals from twenty samples make that visible in a way no definition does, and the one that misses is not a mistake.
The interval that integrates
A credible interval for one group in a hierarchy has to average over every value the population spread might take. That averaging is what makes it cover — 95.2% against the plug-in's 78.8% — and it costs 31% more width, a heavier tail, and a mixture rather than a normal.
An interval that covers and says nothing
A procedure returning the whole line 95% of the time and the empty set otherwise has coverage exactly 95% at every parameter value. Two real intervals at forty observations have expected widths of 0.2418 and 0.2417 and worst-case coverages of 55.31% and 92.21%.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
CoverageConfidence intervalBinomial proportionClopper–PearsonClosed formConservative intervalCredible intervalEmpirical BayesExact enumerationFlat priorHierarchical modelInterval width