3 ms·
> Also, as suggested in the comments, I used a chi-square goodness-of-fit test to see if the deviation is statistically significant, but it was not; with a p-va
by mbateman 16y ago
> Also, as suggested in the comments, I used a chi-square goodness-of-fit test to see if the deviation is statistically significant, but it was not; with a p-value of 0.2303. Meaning we would fail to reject the null hypothesis: the observed data were a good fit for a Benford process. That said, the p-value is not so large as to suggest total adherence.
Welcome to stats 101. If you get p > 0.05, it means your test failed to tell you anything. Which means your test failed to tell you about the likelihood of tampering.
- whyenot 16y agoYou are on the right track, but no, it is more subtle than that. The test could still be meaningful depending on what probability of false positives you are willing to accept. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-value http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-value [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_and_type_II_errors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_and_type_II_errors