4 ms·
> So they just graphed the assumption as if it was data, rather than an assumption. Many studies make an assumption and then explore the implications of that a
by spuz 4y ago
> So they just graphed the assumption as if it was data, rather than an assumption.
Many studies make an assumption and then explore the implications of that assumption. They are not claiming that democratic countries have accurate official GDP figures. They are simply saying: if democratic countries' GDP figures are accurate then the correlation factor between GDP and light output is X. If the correlation factor between GDP and light output is X for all countries (another assumption) then the discrepancy between expected GDP and official GDP is Y. That's all they are saying, they are not presenting made up data as facts.
- riedel 4y agoNot only that the GDPR must be reported in the same way but also that the system be comparable/generalisable. The free country correlation pretty much is the 'traing error' here. If there is e.g. a systematic bias with light and freedom one also might have a problem. Also the pretty much assume a linear model as the GDPR is much higher in the 'free' world. Still it is actually good to have such a proxy measures. Wonder if authoritarian regimes will now have dedicated lighting development strategies...