The minimum sample size needed for reliable conclusions varies. For surveys, around 400 samples are often used for a 95% confidence level and 5% margin of error. In this game, factors like loot variability/wave can affect this, so more samples might be needed for accuracyI have an off topic question, what would the minimum sample size be for data needed in order to draw a statistical conclusion from ?
Perfect thanks. I am going to hate statistics. 20 samples per run at a cost of 3.1 ped (yes I am going to use an md1) roundup(400/20,0)*3.1 is about $7 total. Also the locations that I am going to be sampling from are not exactly going to be random, but that is the point, I want to see by how my sample hitrate differs from the mean.The minimum sample size needed for reliable conclusions varies. For surveys, around 400 samples are often used for a 95% confidence level and 5% margin of error. In this game, factors like loot variability/wave can affect this, so more samples might be needed for accuracy
I have an off topic question, what would the minimum sample size be for data needed in order to draw a statistical conclusion from ?
It also looks like some areas are biased to either ore or matter.
There’s a post I mentioned it in awhile back with the details, but you’d just have to use a power calculator to determine minimal sample size. At least for the tests done in my threads, the sample size was already more than enough. More is needed depending on what the response variable is, number of comparisons, etc. I’ll see if I can dig the numbers up again someday. IIRC, around 400 was a good amount for the finder decay testing, in part because it dealt with small differences.The minimum sample size needed for reliable conclusions varies. For surveys, around 400 samples are often used for a 95% confidence level and 5% margin of error. In this game, factors like loot variability/wave can affect this, so more samples might be needed for accuracy
Makes a lot of sense.There’s a post I mentioned it in awhile back with the details, but you’d just have to use a power calculator to determine minimal sample size. At least for the tests done in my threads, the sample size was already more than enough. More is needed depending on what the response variable is, number of comparisons, etc. I’ll see if I can dig the numbers up again someday. IIRC, around 400 was a good amount for the finder decay testing, in part because it dealt with small differences.
As for variability or waves, that should already be incorporated into the statistical tests or especially experimental design for the latter. If you are concerned about waves while testing the difference in average MU between treatments or something like that, waves shouldn’t be a confounding factor if you’re switching between treatments (e.g., amped or not) each claim.
That’s partly why you don’t go testing one method X-hundred times and then go try the other method the same amount, especially if it’s over the course of days or weeks later. The two aren’t statistically comparable at that point. If you keep the treatments as close to pair-wise as possible, then both should be getting the same background variation from nuisance factors.
It's true, my uncle is Mr MindfartIf your facing SE during drop and jump 3 times you get better hitrate!
HR should be the same across the board, just don't mine when the HR is low, wait for others to fill the poolIf your facing SE during drop and jump 3 times you get better hitrate!
HR should be the same across the board, just don't mine when the HR is low, wait for others to fill the pool
You think about it to much buddy. Just get out in the areas with high mu cycle and have fun. Every time I think about my mining I just lose money so I just go with flow.I have a few questions on about the results of this test...
I decided to edit this as what I was asking did not make any sense to me. So I will ask this instead. If multiple miners decrease the hit rate in an area, will one miner in an area do the same over time ?
Assume that there is a finite amount of resources in an area, if an avatar extracts more than from that area than what the area can naturally replenish, there will be less resources and therefore a lower hitrate. Therefore resources should always drop off until they are refreshed. You should then also see a sawtooth wave while mining with the peak being the second the refresh happens and then it all going downhill from there.
Loot is not distributed evenly across all it's sizes, it is heavily tail ended. Please read the research gate paper for more details, link is in my signature under more reading.
As if a md1 can obtain high mu resources....You think about it to much buddy. Just get out in the areas with high mu cycle and have fun. Every time I think about my mining I just lose money so I just go with flow.
12527,14 | 14237,91 | 113,66% | 16128,36 | 128,75% | 3601,22 | Totall ped | 1565,76 | 1171,42 | 105,06 | 906,44 | 196,95 | 65,00 | 4235,76 | 63,57 | 472,42 | 4,50 | 97,24 | 1751,18 | 1064,64 | |
1710,77 | 3601,22 | Totall % | 12,50% | 9,35% | 0,84% | 7,24% | 1,57% | 0,46% | 33,81% | 0,51% | 27,61% | 0,03% | 0,78% | 13,98% | 8,50% | |||||
Cost net | TT | TT+% | Sales | Sales+% | Profit/loss | Belkar | Caldo | Caldo | Cumbriz | Cumbriz | Gold | Iron | Iron | Iron | Langotz | Lano | Lyst | Narc | ||
Minimum needed | 77,67% | Sale % | 123,09% | 109,69% | 109,69% | 106,10% | 116,10% | 106,94% | 114,41% | 110,90% | 114,41% | 190,00% | 145,19% | 108,15% | 111,71% |
Sweetstuff magerian and few others can be obtained at lower depths. Also add to fact that not many exclusively mine at those depths I'd say you got a chance.As if a md1 can obtain high mu resources....
I am researching, not really in it for profit.