  In most relevant cases in the Bayesian analysis of ODE inverse problems, a
numerical solver needs to be used. Therefore, we cannot work with the exact
theoretical posterior distribution but only with an approximate posterior
deriving from the error in the numerical solver. To compare a numerical and the
theoretical posterior distributions we propose to use Bayes Factors (BF),
considering both of them as models for the data at hand. We prove that the
theoretical vs a numerical posterior BF tends to 1, in the same order (of the
step size used) as the numerical forward map solver does. For higher order
solvers (eg. Runge-Kutta) the Bayes Factor is already nearly 1 for step sizes
that would take far less computational effort. Considerable CPU time may be
saved by using coarser solvers that nevertheless produce practically error free
posteriors. Two examples are presented where nearly 90% CPU time is saved while
all inference results are identical to using a solver with a much finer time
step.
