2 ms·
I strongly disagree. Some people have come to understand “outlier” as “temporary noise in the data”. That is very bad. This chart shows that 2023 is clearly mu
by jncfhnb 3y ago
I strongly disagree. Some people have come to understand “outlier” as “temporary noise in the data”. That is very bad.
This chart shows that 2023 is clearly multiple standard deviations lower than the historical mean, and much lower than any point in the last few decades.
If your latest datapoint is a huge outlier and you have nothing to explain it you should consider feeling alarm that this is significant and perhaps a step change from historical norms.
- weinzierl 3y agoThis is a very good point but different from my gripe with the article. If a person collapses in front of me in the street and I cannot feel a pulse I don't need a trend to take action. My issue with the article is that if there is a trend (which I suspect) they could have easily shown it. If there is no trend they should have been clear about it and they could have made an argument similar to the one you made above - if they wanted to.
- jncfhnb 3y agoEh. The inflection point that makes 2023 noteworthy is in May 2023. It seems unlikely to me that you would find a meaningful trend looking further back. If there was one, it was small. The advantage of this chart is you can see it IS a big outlier.