3 ms·
Recall the quoted passage: > “If numbers 1, 2, and 3 won the last 3 rounds, [I could determine] what was most likely to win the next 3.” That is unambiguously
by lisper 5y ago
Recall the quoted passage:
> “If numbers 1, 2, and 3 won the last 3 rounds, [I could determine] what was most likely to win the next 3.”
That is unambiguously claiming not just a contingent bias, but a bias contingent on the previous three rounds. My math was based on a one-round contingent bias. That is already in the realm of extremely unlikely. Three-rounds is just flat-out impossible.
- anamexis 5y agoI don't think it's unambiguous. I think the parent's interpretation is also quite possible (even probable, given your point that the contingent interpretation is impossible).
- Nullabillity 5y ago> That is unambiguously claiming not just a contingent bias, but a bias contingent on the previous three rounds. No it isn't, only that three rounds may be enough to predict the bias. Whether the bias actually depends on previous results is irrelevant to the quote.
- lisper 5y ago> three rounds may be enough to predict the bias That is an even more absurd claim.
- melony 5y agoWould a bias contingent on the previous 3 be considered Markovian in this case?