mlr3proba
mlr3proba is shedding weight as its survival work moves into sibling packages
Comparison · Analytics
bayestestR vs probably
A side-by-side editorial comparison of bayestestR and probably — release velocity, themes, recent moves, and the top alternatives to consider.
bayestestR vs probably: at a glance
What is bayestestR?
Bayesian diagnostics get stricter defaults while the Stan backend list widens
bayestestR is the diagnostics and hypothesis-testing layer of the easystats stack, and its recent releases have concentrated on two things: reporting the right uncertainty numbers by default, and accepting posterior draws from more sources. The 0.18.x line added CmdStanFit support alongside the existing rstanarm/brms paths and switched effective-sample-size reporting to tail-ESS. Bug-fix releases in between are mostly CRAN-check maintenance.
What is probably?
The package that made calibration a step instead of an afterthought.
probably started as a small utility for class predictions and equivocal zones, and version 1.0.0 turned it into tidymodels' calibration and uncertainty package: cal_plot_*, cal_estimate_*, cal_validate_* and cal_apply across binary, multiclass and regression problems, plus conformal prediction intervals. Since then the work has been consolidation — a large internal refactor with no API change, split conformal and conformal quantile regression, bound_prediction(), and required_pkgs() and butcher methods so conformal objects can be deployed and stripped.
bayestestR vs probably: editorial side-by-side
bayestestR
0.0ANALYTICS
Bayesian diagnostics get stricter defaults while the Stan backend list widens
◆ Current state
bayestestR is the diagnostics and hypothesis-testing layer of the easystats stack, and its recent releases have concentrated on two things: reporting the right uncertainty numbers by default, and accepting posterior draws from more sources. The 0.18.x line added CmdStanFit support alongside the existing rstanarm/brms paths and switched effective-sample-size reporting to tail-ESS. Bug-fix releases in between are mostly CRAN-check maintenance.
◆ Where it's heading
The package is converging on a single posture: work with raw MCMC draws from anywhere, and report the diagnostic that actually governs the interval being shown. Successive releases have swapped defaults rather than added surface area, and the efficiency work in 0.16.x aimed squarely at large brms and rstanarm fits. Output formatting is drifting toward the shared easystats display() and tinytable path.
◆ Prediction
Expect continued backend coverage on the Stan side and further alignment of print/display behavior with insight and the rest of easystats; the entries do not show a push into new inference methods.
probably
0.0ANALYTICS
The package that made calibration a step instead of an afterthought.
◆ Current state
probably started as a small utility for class predictions and equivocal zones, and version 1.0.0 turned it into tidymodels' calibration and uncertainty package: cal_plot_*, cal_estimate_*, cal_validate_* and cal_apply across binary, multiclass and regression problems, plus conformal prediction intervals. Since then the work has been consolidation — a large internal refactor with no API change, split conformal and conformal quantile regression, bound_prediction(), and required_pkgs() and butcher methods so conformal objects can be deployed and stripped.
◆ Where it's heading
The recent releases are about making these objects survive leaving the session. butcher and required_pkgs() methods are what a model needs to be pinned, containerised and served, and their arrival alongside workflows adding a tailor postprocessing stage and vetiver adding probably support points the same way: calibration is being moved out of analysis scripts and into the deployed pipeline. The cal_*_none() reference implementations are the tell that calibration is now something people tune rather than apply once.
◆ Prediction
Expect the calibration functions to be reachable directly from a tuned workflow's postprocessing stage rather than applied to predictions afterwards, following the tailor integration that workflows just shipped.
Alternatives to bayestestR and probably
Other Analytics products tracked by Sparkpulse, ranked by recent ship velocity. Each card links to a full editorial trajectory and lets you pivot into a head-to-head comparison with either bayestestR or probably.
mlr3viz
mlr3viz keeps the ecosystem's plots working while the plots themselves move out
mlr3tuning
mlr3tuning is rebuilding its async machinery under a stable public surface
timetk
timetk swallowed anomalize whole, then went quiet for two years
modelbased
modelbased is turning marginal effects into a full contrast grammar
parameters
easystats' parameters package absorbs one more model class every few weeks
See all bayestestR alternatives → · See all probably alternatives →
Recent activity from bayestestR and probably
Latest ship moves from both products, interleaved chronologically. ⚡ = editorial spark.
- 2mo agobayestestRmcse() gains a centrality argument
- 2mo agobayestestRCmdStanFit support and tail-ESS as the default diagnostic
- 10mo agoprobablyConformal objects gain required_pkgs() and butcher methods
- 11mo agobayestestRrope() gains complement probabilities; display() methods added
- 1y agoprobablyggplot2 test updates and a clearer validation-set error
- 1y agobayestestRdescribe_posterior() efficiency and multinomial handling
- 1y agoprobablyCalibration internals refactored; isotonic bootstrap bug fixed
- 1y agobayestestReffects argument changes behavior for large brms/rstanarm fits
- 1y agobayestestRTail ESS returned from effective_sample() and its callers
- 2y agoprobablyFix grouping sensitivity to variable type
- 3y agoprobablySplit conformal and conformal quantile regression added
- 3y agoprobablyCalibration and conformal inference arrive in tidymodels ⚡
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between bayestestR and probably?
They serve adjacent needs but don't currently overlap on shipped themes. bayestestR and probably are shipping at a similar cadence (velocity 0.0 vs 0.0, both within Sparkpulse's "active" band). See the at-a-glance table above for a side-by-side breakdown of velocity, recent sparks, and editorial themes.
Is bayestestR better than probably?
Sparkpulse doesn't pick a winner — we score release velocity, not feature parity. bayestestR and probably are shipping at a similar cadence (velocity 0.0 vs 0.0, both within Sparkpulse's "active" band). For your specific use case, the alternatives sections above list other Analytics products to evaluate alongside.
What are the best alternatives to bayestestR?
Top bayestestR alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "bayestestR alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/bayestestr for the full list with editorial commentary on each.
What are the best alternatives to probably?
Top probably alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "probably alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/probably for the full list with editorial commentary on each.