Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

abyssalrook@mstdn.socialA

abyssalrook@mstdn.social

@abyssalrook@mstdn.social
About
Posts
5
Topics
0
Shares
0
Groups
0
Followers
0
Following
0

View Original

Posts

Recent Best Controversial

  • Had a lot of fun with my stats students today.
    abyssalrook@mstdn.socialA abyssalrook@mstdn.social

    @IngaLovinde As for the latter, that is entirely true from a research perspective, but I picked the 3-of-a-kind pattern because I assumed the non-random list was entirely human constructed, and that particular pattern is one that sticks out to us the most. Someone making a list by hand is more likely to see "6-6-6" as less random than "6-1-2" or "3-4-5".

    I did not clock 'Which is random?' as one being a dice roll and the other being a shuffled deck of prescribed cards.

    Uncategorized

  • Had a lot of fun with my stats students today.
    abyssalrook@mstdn.socialA abyssalrook@mstdn.social

    @IngaLovinde I'm not following the first problem in the logic. The situation you're describing might be important if we're looking at more and more instances of it happening, but looking at it happening at least once (~94%) doesn't change at all, and it happening ONLY once might jiggle the ~8% estimate I had, but not significantly move it.

    Uncategorized

  • Had a lot of fun with my stats students today.
    abyssalrook@mstdn.socialA abyssalrook@mstdn.social

    @futurebird Also somehow I was wrong. Either I did my calculation wrong or that 8% chance really slipped through and I picked the absolutely wrong metric to judge this.

    Alternately, I didn't consider HOW the non-random list was made and just assumed it was just someone with a pencil picking numbers based purely on vibes, when there was just a different, non-random methodology.

    Uncategorized

  • Had a lot of fun with my stats students today.
    abyssalrook@mstdn.socialA abyssalrook@mstdn.social

    @futurebird The point is, having it appear once is something like a 94% chance. Seeing a 3-of-a-kind appear more than once is very much expected in a random distribution.

    But it's NOT what we EXPECT a random distribution to look like, from a human perspective. When people see things like that appear, they get nervous. If they're making a list to LOOK random, having 3 of the same number in a row starts to feel NOT random, like it's some kind of pattern, and so they won't do it much.

    Uncategorized

  • Had a lot of fun with my stats students today.
    abyssalrook@mstdn.socialA abyssalrook@mstdn.social

    @futurebird Before I look at where the answer shows up, my guess would be that List A is random.

    The odds of both dice being the same number when you roll 2 dice is 1/6 (36 possibilities, 6 desired results). For 3, that becomes 1/36. (6*6*6 possibilities, 6 desired).

    What we have here is 98 consecutive possible places for a 3-of-a-kind to start. The odds that you would only draw the 1/36 chance ONCE (The 3 2's near the beginning of B) is something like....8%?

    Uncategorized
  • Login

  • Login or register to search.
  • First post
    Last post
0
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups