LogFAQs > #887241140

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, Database 2 ( 09.16.2017-02.21.2018 ), DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Condoms only working 97% of the time seems like a low ball
Dash_Harber 09/25/17 1:02:04 AM #39:	Sahuagin posted... k after simulating it, I should have known better. the highest chance is for it to happen instantly, with steadily less chance after that. not sure the 34th event has any significance whatsoever, but I still sort of feel like it must. graph of 100,000 attempts, saving how many tries it took to 'win' a 3% chance. (bottom scale is 1-100 tries with anything beyond that ignored). (not surprisingly there was about a 3,000/100,000 chance for it to occur on the first try.) now I'm thinking, it must be the sum. not, "what is the chance that it happened AT this point", but "what is the chance that it happened UP TO THIS point". Sahuagin posted... here's the accumulated chance, using the same data: 25% around 10 tries 50% around 25 tries 75% around 45 tries so the 50/50 mark is around 75% of the way to the 'average', with it compressed on the left and stretched out on the right. Isn't charting it like that a perfect example of the gambler's fallacy? Doing it multiple times doesn't actually change the percentage of it happening each time. <cite>Dash_Harber posted [p:887241140] in Condoms on... [t:75807730]...</cite> <quote><cite>Sahuagin posted...</cite> <quote>k after simulating it, I should have known better. the highest chance is for it to happen instantly, with steadily less chance after that. not sure the 34th event has any significance whatsoever, but I still sort of feel like it must. graph of 100,000 attempts, saving how many tries it took to 'win' a 3% chance. (bottom scale is 1-100 tries with anything beyond that ignored). (not surprisingly there was about a 3,000/100,000 chance for it to occur on the first try.) now I'm thinking, it must be the sum. not, "what is the chance that it happened AT this point", but "what is the chance that it happened UP TO THIS point".</quote> <cite>Sahuagin posted...</cite> <quote>here's the accumulated chance, using the same data: 25% around 10 tries 50% around 25 tries 75% around 45 tries so the 50/50 mark is around 75% of the way to the 'average', with it compressed on the left and stretched out on the right.</quote> Isn't charting it like that a perfect example of the gambler's fallacy? Doing it multiple times doesn't actually change the percentage of it happening each time.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1