On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 7:54 PM, LuKreme <[email protected]> wrote: > On 22-Feb-2009, at 01:35, Mark Smith wrote: >> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 5:47 AM, LuKreme <[email protected]> wrote: >>> So, I am 95% certain that the true probability is in the range of >>> 16.72% to 35.77% or so. So, my 'sense' that 19/78 is pretty close to >>> 25% is pretty much shit. >> >> The spread isn't that bad. If your suspicion is correct (and it might >> well be) that the actual "rate" is 1 in 4. This test tells you that >> both "1 in 5" and "1 in 3" must be close to being outliers (given a >> normal distribution about your value of 19/78). > > Bit I have no reason to think the rate is exactly 1/4, 23.817234% is > perfectly possible since the mechanism is completely hidden inside the > bowels of a computer game. Still, at least I know how 'sure' the > number is, which is what I wanted in the first place
I realize that. The point is that using the regression method, you can pick arbitrary limits (mine were 1/3 and 1/5 - chosen for convenience, but you could pick 0.22 and 0.26, or any other pair) and evaluate the importance of the delta between each limit and your best fit. _______________________________________________ OSX-Nutters mailing list | [email protected] http://lists.tit-wank.com/mailman/listinfo/osx-nutters List hosted at http://cat5.org/
