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
    predictive analytics risk management
    How Predictive Analytics Is Redefining Risk Management Across Industries
    7 Min Read
    data analytics and gold trading
    Data Analytics and the New Era of Gold Trading
    9 Min Read
    composable analytics
    How Composable Analytics Unlocks Modular Agility for Data Teams
    9 Min Read
    data mining to find the right poly bag makers
    Using Data Analytics to Choose the Best Poly Mailer Bags
    12 Min Read
    data analytics for pharmacy trends
    How Data Analytics Is Tracking Trends in the Pharmacy Industry
    5 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

Cloud Nine
The Low-Down On Using Data Science And Statistics In Advertising
AI Advances Drive New Generation of Browser-Based Solutions
my DeveloperWorks Goes Social
Wanted: Senior Vice President of Social Networking

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

street address database
Why Data-Driven Companies Rely on Accurate Street Address Databases
Big Data Exclusive
predictive analytics risk management
How Predictive Analytics Is Redefining Risk Management Across Industries
Analytics Exclusive Predictive Analytics
data analytics and gold trading
Data Analytics and the New Era of Gold Trading
Analytics Big Data Exclusive
student learning AI
Advanced Degrees Still Matter in an AI-Driven Job Market
Artificial Intelligence Exclusive

Stay Connected

1.2kFollowersLike
33.7kFollowersFollow
222FollowersPin

You Might also Like

google nexus BI lesson
Uncategorized

4 Retail BI Lessons to Learn from Google’s Nexus Fail

5 Min Read

“Average” Statistics that Bruise Our Ears

4 Min Read

Probability and Karl Rove

2 Min Read

The Global Nature of Big Data and Analytics

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 is improving the safety of cars
From Bolts to Bots: How AI Is Fortifying the Automotive Industry
Artificial Intelligence
giveaway chatbots
How To Get An Award Winning Giveaway Bot
Big Data Chatbots Exclusive

Quick Link

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

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address
Password

Lost your password?