|
Re: A simple test; results |
EQF; Having nothing better to do, I put your signal times into an array of all the days from your first signal to the end of the month of your last signal. Then I added all the mag 7+ quakes for the same period. Finally I counted the number of days between each signal day and the first quake following within 100 days. You had 49 signals but because of multiple signals per day it narrowed down to 27 signal days. Those 27 signals captured 18 quakes within 100 days ow which 15 were within the first 8 days. 4 were on the same day as the signal. Now the odds on getting a mag 7+ quake with an 8 day window are 0.278 so you should only have gotten 7.5 of them. When I plug those numbers into the binomial test it says the chances are 0.001 So unless I made a mistake somewhere (not impossible) .... YOU PASS THE TEST! Roger Follow Ups: ● Re: A simple test; results - Roger Hunter 16:29:09 - 6/11/2011 (78928) (2) ● Re: A simple test; results - Canie 12:49:18 - 6/12/2011 (78930) (2) ● Forecasting Dangers – June 15, 2011 - EQF 23:37:14 - 6/14/2011 (78935) (2) ● not really - John Vidale 13:56:59 - 6/15/2011 (78937) (0) ● Earthquake Location Information – June 15, 2011 - EQF 23:50:46 - 6/14/2011 (78936) (0) ● Re: A simple test; results - Roger Hunter 21:17:01 - 6/12/2011 (78931) (0) ● Re: A simple test; results; caveat - Roger Hunter 16:40:51 - 6/11/2011 (78929) (0) |
|