4 ms·
Eh, you can't cherry pick specific (model, year) combinations after the fact without overfitting. You expect some variation in deaths per (model, year) and by s
by aoeusnth1 9y ago
Eh, you can't cherry pick specific (model, year) combinations after the fact without overfitting. You expect some variation in deaths per (model, year) and by searching for the least deadly ones, you'll dramatically influence your estimate simply because you used a maximizing search instead of a broad survey of a-priori safe models.
- jakewins 9y agoThis is totally true, and I agree; I tried to guard against this at the end with the "I think this is enough to state a hypothesis, which would then need to be tested.." paragraph. However - the same is true for 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 model XC90s, and they are just one of 10 models that had no fatalities in those four model years in the study. I just picked that year and model to get one data point for mileage to compare; the other model years of XC90 have similar sales, so the same applies. So, while you're right, I don't think it's an entirely useless comparison; it indicates there could be something here, which could then be used to state a falsifiable hypothesis, something like: "Similar cohort drivers would be safer in <one of these ten models> than in a Tesla.".
- emn13 9y agoAt a minimum it indicates that Tesla's numbers do not seem exceptionally safe, even if you can't say they're less safe than comparable competitors either. Given the low number of incidents, you probably want to be looking at something other that fatalities to get a large enough pool of incidents to reduce the impact pure chance; at least in addition to actual fatalities. It's not going to be an easy comparison, that's for sure.