Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ajita al Tchar
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
115
|
Posted - 2012.03.12 21:49:00 -
[31] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:[quote=Liselle D'solos] look on the bright side. you just took 44 failures off the table. Statistically for every run of bad luck you should get a run of good luck to even it out.
This line of thinking is a major contributor to all the drama that surrounds invention failure. What you're saying is roughly equivalent to a famous example of fallacious usage of stats where a man takes a bomb on an airplane with him because he heard that his chance of being on a flight that has a bomb are 1/10,000 (or whatever) and he wanted to get that out of the way to fly safely for many more years. Or people telling their skydiving friends that ohnoes, they had 500 successful jumps, but don't they know that a parachute will malfunction and not open 0.5% of the time, so they are due for a splat any time now. Random variables don't work like that.
See, you're kiiiiind of right saying what you said, but for the wrong reason. Chances are very good that the unlucky inventor will end up with enough successful inventions to bump the numbers to where they are expected to be. But this won't necessarily be the case, and if it happens it has nothing with them getting that crapass 44/45 failure run. Every single event is independent, it has nothing to do with the past or the future, it doesn't care how many people are running invention jobs, etc. It might as well be the only such event ever, but it still has some probability of flipping this way, or flopping that way. So, thinking that this bad run will be made up for by good runs later is reasonable (I console myself like that after double-digit numbers of failures...),but it's not technically accurate because there's always the possibility that it won't happen ever until you give up on invention for good. |
Kaaii
Kaaii-Net Research Labs KAAII-NET
6
|
Posted - 2012.03.12 22:13:00 -
[32] - Quote
"Invention is for people with poor math skills....."
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
294
|
Posted - 2012.03.12 22:40:00 -
[33] - Quote
Ford Chicago wrote:Bugsy VanHalen wrote: in a large enough sample size the odds will always even out. No, that is just the most likely outcome.
Large enough sample = keep going until it does
The numbers are working out for me, for example. Actually, I'm inventing more than I can manufacture, right now. Just waiting for manufacturing alts to spool up. FuzzWork Enterprises http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ Blueprint calculator and other 'useful' utilities. |
Sexorella hotz
SexyCor
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.13 03:41:00 -
[34] - Quote
The probability I obtain is 0.000012 for one or fewer successes out of 45, so one in ~100,000, which one can I think reasonably argue must happen to someone at some point. However...
The argument that with enough inventions things will average does not work, anyone who suggests it does does not know how to deal with cumulative probability or binomial distributions, but that is neither here nor there, this issue is worked directly into the OPs argument by using the binomial distribution. Maybe it will help if I say I was a math major in undergrad with continued studies at the graduate level (except I avoided stats cause its lame and unpleasant), point is, binomial takes this into account, whereas single event probability does not.
I invent plenty, and likewise have very improbable strings of both successes and failures, and I see variation by ship type. I get the impression from this that things aren't governed by a random number generator, but also perhaps a weighting system, i.e. market quota and such to improve price stability or something. Given the volume, I feel this shouldn't be necessary, but I think anyone could comb through their results and find incredibly improbably streams of success/failures, of course the success streaks are rarely of note. |
Krixtal Icefluxor
Bison - Ammatar Thunder Thundering Herd
368
|
Posted - 2012.03.13 11:28:00 -
[35] - Quote
It's called chance and probability. This is completely normal.
I've had several batches of Hulk Inventions, batches of 25 and 30, etc. utterly fail many times the past 2 years.
I've also had 10 of 10 successes upon occasion.
It all works out in the end statistically. OMG He Spent His Free-áAURUM ! God is simply-áthe very extraordinary power of the Universe to organize Itself as percieved. -á-á- Lee Smolin "Three Roads to Quantum Gravity" |
Ersteen Hofs
Republic University Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2012.03.13 12:35:00 -
[36] - Quote
Sexorella hotz wrote:The probability I obtain is 0.000012 for one or fewer successes out of 45, so one in ~100,000 , which one can I think reasonably argue must happen to someone at some point. However... The argument that with enough inventions things will average does not work yup, the error people keep making here is thinking that long string of failures somehow affects the following trials. in reality each trial is completely independent.
sure you can say that some large sample (like 1000) will always produce exactly specified known percentage but the reality is, you don't KNOW which sample size will produce that percentage - it can be anything including 1e+3 and 1e+3000 with different probabilities.
Quote: quick example of how binomial works: Probability of single success: 0.27 Probability that one or fewer of 2 trials will succeed: 0.93 (9 in 10) Probability that one or fewer of 5 trials will succeed: 0.59 (3 in 5)
I think you used inverse probability here instead of direct.
if probability of success is 0.27, probability that at least 1 of 2 attempts will succeed is the same as 1 minus probability of both attempts failing which is 1-(1-0.27)**2 = 0.467, 5 attempts is 1-(1-0.27)**5 = 0.793, etc.
Quote: I invent plenty, and likewise have very improbable strings of both successes and failures, and I see variation by ship type. I get the impression from this that things aren't governed by a random number generator, but also perhaps a weighting system, i.e. market quota and such to improve price stability or something. Given the volume, I feel this shouldn't be necessary, but I think anyone could comb through their results and find incredibly improbably streams of success/failures, of course the success streaks are rarely of note.
keeping track of every invention attempt adds even more mindless clicking to already huge clickfest the invention is now, so I stopped doing that a while ago... but from what I have gathered, the overall chance is exactly as expected. I did not do per item stats but I don't think they are really item dependent. Overall score should be more trustworthy since by definition it has larger sample volume. |
Ninyania alCladdyth
McLuvin AstroDynamics
22
|
Posted - 2012.03.13 16:04:00 -
[37] - Quote
Ajita al Tchar wrote:This line of thinking is a major contributor to all the drama that surrounds invention failure. What you're saying is roughly equivalent to a famous example of fallacious usage of stats where a man takes a bomb on an airplane with him because he heard that his chance of being on a flight that has a bomb are 1/10,000 (or whatever) and he wanted to get that out of the way to fly safely for many more years. Or people telling their skydiving friends that ohnoes, they had 500 successful jumps, but don't they know that a parachute will malfunction and not open 0.5% of the time, so they are due for a splat any time now. Random variables don't work like that.
Reminds me of the guy who read the statistic that 1 in 10 children in the USA are Hispanic, so he and his wife stopped after their ninth child, as neither wanted to learn Spanish. |
Cyniac
Twilight Star Rangers Black Thorne Alliance
171
|
Posted - 2012.03.13 16:37:00 -
[38] - Quote
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:Statistically for every run of bad luck you should get a run of good luck to even it out.
This is a very misleading statement as future events are independent of past events.
The only thing which is true is that you'll have a 27% chance of success on your next attempt. That's it. You do not get a run of good luck for a run of bad luck - ever. You just get a new result.
What people tend to call good luck and bad luck are simply deviations from the expected result. Thing is statistics tells us that deviations from the expected result is what is most likely to happen, not least. When you increase the number of results the deviation of the aggregated results is expected to diminish, but even over a million results you will not have a distribution which perfectly matches the expected result (though it probably would be pretty close).
Having said all that - ouch 44 failures out of 45 runs hurts.
|
Kraig2
T.O.R. Absolute Damage Inc.
1
|
Posted - 2012.03.13 18:20:00 -
[39] - Quote
I'm pretty sure everyone already said it, but...
This is normal, this is called chance.
A chance of 1/10 doesn't mean if you do it 10 times you will get one certain success. No, you have 1/10 chance every time.
What is the likelihood of me getting 2 success streak?
1/10*1/10 = 1/100 |
Taedrin
Kushan Industrial
385
|
Posted - 2012.03.13 19:37:00 -
[40] - Quote
Brock Nelson wrote:This isn't about probability, it's about statistics. Come back when you've conducted 1000 inventions and still have only 97% failure, then you might just have a legit complaint.
Actually, according to statistics the rule of thumb is that you only need a sample size of about 30.
The OP experience a statistically unlikely event. This will eventually happen if you consider EVE's entire population of players. Sorry dude, you won the anti-lottery. |
|
Taedrin
Kushan Industrial
385
|
Posted - 2012.03.13 19:44:00 -
[41] - Quote
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:It's called chance and probability. This is completely normal.
I've had several batches of Hulk Inventions, batches of 25 and 30, etc. utterly fail many times the past 2 years.
I've also had 10 of 10 successes upon occasion.
It all works out in the end statistically.
Wrong - it is only normal that it has happened to SOMEONE, not that it happened to the OP. This is like car accidents - it is likely that SOMEONE will get into a car accident this year. But it is NOT likely that this someone will be YOU.
Now, it might be normal if the OP's sample size is actually much larger than he is claiming. The larger your sample size is, the more likely that you will find statistically unlikely events - for the same reason that if you increase the number of people in a room, you increase the chances that one of those people has been in a car accident before. |
Molang
MyXGamer
23
|
Posted - 2012.03.13 22:21:00 -
[42] - Quote
I love these posts!! every update or once every other month or so we rehash the probability of inventions. It amazes me how many people still talk about it (yes, I see the irony of this comment).
As a counter to the terrible luck the original poster has. I just want to talk about my 15/20 success with my raven blue print using tuning instructions.
See it all balances out in the end. good luck recovering the costs on that crappy invention luck! |
Shayla Sh'inlux
Aliastra Gallente Federation
33
|
Posted - 2012.03.14 10:54:00 -
[43] - Quote
Quote: Most people struggle with standard deviation theory. 44 fails out of 45 attempts with a 27% chance of success would be well within expectations.
I'm pretty sure it's you that struggles with standard deviation.
The standard deviation of a binominal distribution with 45 trials with a 27% success rate is 2,94. The expected number of successfull attempts is 12,15
1 success is more than 3 times the standard deviations away from the expected value, making it anything but within expectations. Can it happen? Sure. Is it likely to happen on a given trial, no. It is likely yo happen with enough trials? Sure. Except that no individual ever does enough trials to have a reasonable chance of running into such an occurance.
You'd need to do about 4000 of these 45-trials to approach a 5% likelyhood to have 44 in 45 fail. At 1 day per invention, that'd be about 11 years of nonstop invention.
Now of course invention is probably still fine, but it's still a totally outlandish extreme result. |
Lady Ayeipsia
Tax Dodging Corporation
51
|
Posted - 2012.03.14 13:45:00 -
[44] - Quote
I remember awhile back seeing people talk about deliverying one invention job at a time. If you selected all of your ready invention and click deliver, the first may succeed, but the rest all fail. Is this true?
Also, say I have 2 alts, one invents and has the skills. The other is just for copying, research, and other non invention tasks. I run jobs at a pos. Is it ok to deliver jobs with the non inventing alt, or should all inventions be delivered by the best skilled alt? |
Maximille Biagge
The Eden Trading International Corporation Curatores Veritatis Alliance
31
|
Posted - 2012.03.14 15:43:00 -
[45] - Quote
Liselle D'solos wrote: To put it another way: If I did a million batches of 45 attempts each, only roughly one of these batches should result in only one success
This is where you went wrong, nothign to do with chance "should" ever do anything or be predictable.
hell you could run your 1 million try and fail every single one of the 45million attempts and it would still only be bad luck.
|
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
749
|
Posted - 2012.03.14 17:23:00 -
[46] - Quote
Lady Ayeipsia wrote:I remember awhile back seeing people talk about deliverying one invention job at a time. If you selected all of your ready invention and click deliver, the first may succeed, but the rest all fail. Is this true?
Not true, but superstitious people like to wave feathers and sprinkle blood because it makes them feel better.
Unless CCP is using a really really crappy PRNG, the chance of you getting a success from one job to the next is the same as the last time you hit "deliver". There's no memory effect, just humans seeing patterns where there aren't patterns because our instinct is to spot patterns (such as that predator lurking in the foliage). |
Montevius Williams
Eclipse Industrial Inc
233
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 02:02:00 -
[47] - Quote
It happens. Watch tomorrow you do 45 attempts again and get 44 out of 45 BPC's. Its rare, but it can happen. |
Tauranon
Weeesearch
34
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 08:24:00 -
[48] - Quote
Shayla Sh'inlux wrote:Quote: Most people struggle with standard deviation theory. 44 fails out of 45 attempts with a 27% chance of success would be well within expectations.
I'm pretty sure it's you that struggles with standard deviation. The standard deviation of a binominal distribution with 45 trials with a 27% success rate is 2,94. The expected number of successfull attempts is 12,15 1 success is more than 3 times the standard deviations away from the expected value, making it anything but within expectations. Can it happen? Sure. Is it likely to happen on a given trial, no. It is likely yo happen with enough trials? Sure. Except that no individual ever does enough trials to have a reasonable chance of running into such an occurance. You'd need to do about 4000 of these 45-trials to approach a 5% likelyhood to have 44 in 45 fail. At 1 day per invention, that'd be about 11 years of nonstop invention. Now of course invention is probably still fine, but it's still a totally outlandish extreme result.
A proportion of the entire inventing playerbase is doing exactly this. There has likely been 4000 x 45 trials of similar probability jobs over the history of invention. This kind of result is both inevitable over a whole playerbase, and likely to cause communication by the victim - ie when it occurs, it was likely to be pointed out.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |