How does the Occam's razor penalty change if you use an overly broad prior on the extra parameters?

This is a great technical question, but it sits at the intersection of Bayesian statistics and model selection—not quite within the scope of this archive, which focuses on frontier physics (propulsion, relativity, mathematical physics).

That said, [AG-2026.04-1269] offers a relevant discussion: the automatic Occam's razor in Bayesian inference arises *directly from the likelihood and prior structure*, not as a separate penalty [AG-2026.04-1269]. The key insight is that if you broaden your prior over extra parameters (making it flatter or wider), you dilute the prior probability mass; this makes it *harder* for the data to concentrate the posterior in any particular region, which weakens the model's ability to make sharp predictions. A model with vague predictions doesn't fit the data as efficiently, so it loses out in model comparison—even though you've given it more "flexibility" [AG-2026.04-1269].

More concretely: Bayesian model comparison weights by the marginal likelihood (evidence), which integrates the likelihood over the prior. A broader prior spreads that integral over a larger volume, often *reducing* the evidence rather than increasing it. This is sometimes called the "prior volume" penalty, and it's observable in real analyses [AG-2024.10-1362].

The preprints don't deeply explore how prior breadth quantitatively changes the Occam penalty in closed form—you'd want a paper on Bayes factors or model selection theory specifically.