Congrats for keeping it up ;-)
Did you learn much? Did you find a bias?
MJ
(I have post here, can't post further down the thread)
I second that. Bravo, Doollow! Keep it going, axiomates, Doollow & Martsopolleahk! Being alive is of utmost importance — second only to
good health.
Ion Saliu wrote:
<snip>
I second that. Bravo, Doollow! Keep it going, axiomates, Doollow &
Martsopolleahk! Being alive is of utmost importance - second only to
good health.
Thank you for the kind words - more than I deserve after all my teasing. You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din!
I'm like a senescent ugly duckling, paddling away below the surface ever
more slowly, in the hope it's not too late to become a swan.
I noticed something strange a while back but wrote it off as a
coincidence. Then something similar happened, then again and again. I've started monitoring it formally because if it holds up, it's weird,
wonderful and mind-blowing. I've been here before only to have my hopes dashed but it's nice to have a bit of optimism to cling to in these
troubled times.
I wish you and your family a prosperous New Year.
Nigel
The correlation betweem my system's predictions for number of repeats
and the actual results has now hit -0.20389041942593, and that's after
44 draws.
I 'cheated' and used my software's TTest function with the following parameters:
Array of predictions
Array of results
2-tailed test (since we're looking for oddities in either direction)
Pairs (since each prediction and result forms a discrete pair)
It calculated the probability as 0.64430697390173.
I'm not sure what that means, but my best guess is that it reckons
there's a 64% chance that something untoward is going on ie not
statistically significant.
Nigel
Did I say dodgy? Most of my software's built-in functions ignore blank
rows. It seems the TTest function is different. So the result I posted
below is wrong, though fortunately not by much.
nigel wrote:
The correlation betweem my system's predictions for number of repeats
and the actual results has now hit -0.20389041942593, and that's after
44 draws.
I 'cheated' and used my software's TTest function with the following
parameters:
Array of predictions
Array of results
2-tailed test (since we're looking for oddities in either direction)
Pairs (since each prediction and result forms a discrete pair)
It calculated the probability as 0.64430697390173.
I'm not sure what that means, but my best guess is that it reckons
there's a 64% chance that something untoward is going on ie not
statistically significant.
Nigel
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 168:04:41 |
| Calls: | 12,096 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 15,003 |
| Messages: | 6,517,819 |