Cookies help us display personalized product recommendations and ensure you have great shopping experience.

By using this site, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Accept
SmartData CollectiveSmartData Collective
  • Analytics
    AnalyticsShow More
    unusual trading activity
    Signal Or Noise? A Decision Tree For Evaluating Unusual Trading Activity
    3 Min Read
    software developer using ai
    How Data Analytics Helps Developers Deliver Better Tech Services
    8 Min Read
    ai for stock trading
    Can Data Analytics Help Investors Outperform Warren Buffett
    9 Min Read
    media monitoring
    Signals In The Noise: Using Media Monitoring To Manage Negative Publicity
    5 Min Read
    data analytics
    How Data Analytics Can Help You Construct A Financial Weather Map
    4 Min Read
  • Big Data
  • BI
  • Exclusive
  • IT
  • Marketing
  • Software
Search
© 2008-25 SmartData Collective. All Rights Reserved.
Reading: The Human Factor Continually Confounds Probability Models
Share
Notification
Font ResizerAa
SmartData CollectiveSmartData Collective
Font ResizerAa
Search
  • About
  • Help
  • Privacy
Follow US
© 2008-23 SmartData Collective. All Rights Reserved.
SmartData Collective > Analytics > Modeling > The Human Factor Continually Confounds Probability Models
ExclusiveModelingPredictive AnalyticsStatistics

The Human Factor Continually Confounds Probability Models

paulbarsch
paulbarsch
3 Min Read
SHARE

With four weeks to go in the 2011 Major League Baseball season, the probability of the Boston Red Sox of making the playoffs was 99.6%. And most of us know the story; in one of the biggest collapses in baseball history, the Red Sox tanked a nine game lead and served the wild card slot to the Tampa Bay Rays. In creating “one for the record books”, the 2011 Red Sox show us that the human factor continually confounds probability models.

With four weeks to go in the 2011 Major League Baseball season, the probability of the Boston Red Sox of making the playoffs was 99.6%. And most of us know the story; in one of the biggest collapses in baseball history, the Red Sox tanked a nine game lead and served the wild card slot to the Tampa Bay Rays. In creating “one for the record books”, the 2011 Red Sox show us that the human factor continually confounds probability models.

Some things aren’t supposed to happen. The 2011 Boston Red Sox certainly should not have missed the playoffs with a nine game lead, and the 1995 Anaheim Angels should not have finished their year 12-26 (losing a nine game lead and missing the playoffs). Moreover, probability models said the stock market (DJIA) should not have lost 54% of its value in the 2008 “Great Recession”.

More Read

First Look – Mobile Agent Technologies
The Role of Cloud Computing in Patient Engagement in Healthcare
DIY Culture: Should Non-IT Employees Be Compensated for Building Apps?
Statistical Learning Papers
Machine Learning Makes VPNs Excellent Options For Cybersecurity

There’s definitely a danger in too much reliance on normal distribution probability models, especially when humans are concerned says Financial Times writer John Authers. 

Studying the 2011 Boston Red Sox, Authers suggests the team may have been overconfident in statistics since few teams in baseball history had collapsed with such a lead.  

Authers also believes bell curve probabilistic models would not have been a reliable indicator of possible failure because such models assume event independence where one event should not affect another. But those who follow sports understand the concept of “momentum in a game”, or even from game-to-game where a team can feed off past success to gain confidence.

In reference to the 2008 market crash, Steven Solmonson, head of Park Place Capital Ltd said; “Not in a million years would we have expected this gyration to be as vicious and enduring as it has been.”  And I’m sure that Boston Red Sox fans didn’t believe their team could lose a significant lead over the Tampa Bay Rays with just a few games left in the season.

Whenever humans are involved, the lesson is clear: don’t get over confident in normal distribution probability models. Next thing you know, you might get slapped (or worse) by the fat tail.

 

 

TAGGED:bayesianbell curveprobabilitystatistics
Share This Article
Facebook Pinterest LinkedIn
Share

Follow us on Facebook

Latest News

0622cae5 f7d7 4f74 84b5 eabd1a823dca
How Data-Driven Grocery Recommendations Help Shoppers Eat Better With Less Effort
Big Data Exclusive
business recovering from data loss
How Data-Driven Businesses Protect MySQL Databases from Shutdown
Big Data Exclusive
ai driven task management
Reducing “Work About Work” with AI Task Managers
Artificial Intelligence Exclusive
data center uptime
Why Rodent-Resistant Conduits Are Critical for Data Center Uptime
Big Data Data Management Exclusive Risk Management

Stay Connected

1.2KFollowersLike
33.7KFollowersFollow
222FollowersPin

You Might also Like

Why Can’t We Just Use Prediction Markets?

6 Min Read

The “decline effect,” random variation, and evidence-based marketing

7 Min Read

When improbable events are expected

5 Min Read

Newsflash: Correlation is Not a Cause!

5 Min Read

SmartData Collective is one of the largest & trusted community covering technical content about Big Data, BI, Cloud, Analytics, Artificial Intelligence, IoT & more.

ai chatbot
The Art of Conversation: Enhancing Chatbots with Advanced AI Prompts
Chatbots
AI and chatbots
Chatbots and SEO: How Can Chatbots Improve Your SEO Ranking?
Artificial Intelligence Chatbots Exclusive

Quick Link

  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy
Follow US
© 2008-25 SmartData Collective. All Rights Reserved.
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address
Password

Lost your password?