3 ms·
You need a suitable non-null hypothesis to start with, too. Suppose we're talking about a regular deck of cards, and someone says "the shuffler gives the first
by dmurray 4y ago
You need a suitable non-null hypothesis to start with, too.
Suppose we're talking about a regular deck of cards, and someone says "the shuffler gives the first player too many hearts". That requires a different test to debunk/support it than the hypothesis "the shuffler gives the third player too many aces".
In other words, any claim that the shuffle is not random needs to include a testable assertion about the direction of bias it has, and allows you to make predictions about the next card with better than random accuracy.
- toxik 4y agoThe null hypothesis is that the cards are drawn from a uniform distribution, and if we only consider land/nonland as categories, it should be pretty straightforward to determine the probability of a sequence of draws under this distribution. Essentially it comes out to a weighted coin toss each time.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- ProjectArcturis 4y agoNo, you can do a Chi-squared to test whether the distribution is significantly different from theory in any way.