XO math people please critique my analysis of MPM 2016 voting irregularity
| Naked greedy bawdyhouse | 12/20/17 | | Motley casino | 12/20/17 | | Drab bat shit crazy mediation coffee pot | 12/20/17 | | Motley casino | 12/20/17 | | Electric balding shrine | 12/20/17 | | stirring mental disorder newt | 12/20/17 | | Naked greedy bawdyhouse | 12/20/17 | | buff racy public bath wrinkle | 02/22/18 | | house-broken 180 pozpig dopamine | 12/20/17 | | Naked greedy bawdyhouse | 12/20/17 | | at-the-ready insane area clown | 12/20/17 | | Naked greedy bawdyhouse | 12/20/17 | | big space toaster | 12/21/17 | | Naked greedy bawdyhouse | 12/20/17 | | Naked greedy bawdyhouse | 12/20/17 | | irate famous landscape painting | 12/20/17 | | big space toaster | 12/20/17 | | house-broken 180 pozpig dopamine | 12/20/17 | | big space toaster | 12/20/17 | | big space toaster | 12/20/17 | | big space toaster | 12/23/17 | | big space toaster | 12/20/17 | | fragrant base | 12/23/17 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: December 20th, 2017 5:34 PM Author: big space toaster
solid analysis, correct math, correct conclusions and implications
the precise results of the analysis depend on your view that the data are normally distrbuted. eyeballing the histogram makes me comfortable that they probably are, but there are a bunch of tests you could do to confirm on a statistical level; you could also explore the possibility that there is a bimodal distribution although the histogram doesn’t look that way
but I’m sure this would be a hilarious outlier under any reasonable distribution
in summary: absolutely devastating
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3835527&forum_id=2#34969211) |
|
|