Call for Research Volunteers
Eikyuu
As the topics studied in my articles get more and more difficult, so do the tools used and gathering the required data. One example is the analysis of phenomena generated by the whole population interacting, like the monetary market or the battle outcomes. As opposed to training costs or company upgrades, the relevant numbers change frequently and a lot of them need to be gathered before the analysis itself.
That is why I am looking for citizens willing to devote some of their time to helping me gather data and speed up the process. I am aware that the degree of involvement and interest vary greatly among us, and for that reason I devised different types of experiments, which will require varying amount of effort.
In general there are two fields to consider: warfare and economics. The former usually draws more attention, but is also harder because of the recent buggy changes to the old battlepage and inaccurate in-game info (like military rank supposedly increasing damage by 5😵
. Most importantly it is a commonly used argument that medals are a consistent and considerable source of income.
I fear that most people advertising this fall victim to the confirmation bias, but that is my guess and to get even preliminary answers to that question serious statistics is needed. For example, have you ever wondered what the probability distribution is for the strength of people who get the medal? Here is an exemplary histogram and Gaussian fit based on division 3 data I gathered myself:
This is just a teaser, with detailed results to follow once enough data is gathered, but you can already see that even the strength of 70k appears to give "only" a 50% chance of getting a medal.
So the first project you could get involved in is related to collecting the battle data. If you would like to help and participate, just leave a comment below stating that you want to take part in the warfare analysis, and whether you want the short/simpler version or longer/complex version. Once there are enough participants – I hope at least 25, for obvious reasons – I will send a message to both groups explaining the details and we can get to work!
In the second area of economics, I would like to research the monetary market, as the split is so commonly used for earning. In particular, the unreasonable way of expressing Gold price in cc is quite inconvenient and it seems that proper timing is crucial in ensuring the realization of one's offer. There are some interesting variations in speed at which the offers disappear and just as a teaser look at the speed distribution in this graph:
I have left the axes blank on purpose to save the really juicy details for later, once there is more data. Hopefully the mystery will provide an incentive. As above there are two options for participation – a short and long one, so if you would like to help, just leave a comment indicating you want to gather economic data. Of course, you can participate in both monetary and battle analysis – that would be ideal!
I hope that with enough people we can overcome the time-zone limitations and quickly reach enough data points to publish meaningful results. And do not worry about knowledge of maths or economics because the tasks involved are really simple. In fact you could use this opportunity to learn it if you want. So do not hesitate – comment and take part!
Comments
Pertamaxxx
v
v
v
sounds good, count me in. o/
Yes! We have the first volunteer 🙂
guys, count me in to
Put me down for the long winded version. I love maths and stats!
If I can help you, I'll be glad 🙂
+ v
Economic Data
time zone: CET (Germany)
V.. but I fear what you will find is correlation, not causation.
In the monetary case I am trying to estimate concrete numbers (speed, frequencies etc.), so neither correlation nor causation.
In the warfare case, the starting point is to find the correlation, and as in any science you distinguish causation from correlation by means of a model and context. It is quite simple here, because obviously winning a medal does not cause your strength to increase – it can only be the other way around.
What models help you prove causation ? I thought only experiments can prove that.
Experiments let you gather data, but the numbers without any prior model/hypothesis are quite meaningless. Think of the Moon and tides. Once you have a proper theory of gravity, you can make observations and conclude that the Moon causes the tides, but without the theory you need to resort to the myth of a giant sea monster, who inhales and exhales the water regularly. Or perhaps you could build the theory upside down by modeling the tide first and then saying that it causes the Moon to orbit, which would also actually be confirmed by the observational data. The fact that we choose the first possibility is only because it is a simpler and more elegant model.
Also, you first said the experiment will only find correlation, now you say it is needed for causation, so which one is it? 😉
I meant that statistics will only show correlation. A strong likelihood can make you accept that there is more likely to be a real effect behind the correlation than not, but that's all to it no? Hypothesis testing will not prove anything except that the theory is wrong. Plus I am not sure about bayesian statistics would need any prior hypothesis. So what models were you talking about?
Well yes, each part of the analysis is not sufficient by itself. What is needed is 1. a theoretical model, 2. observations, 3. statistical analysis. I do not intend to restrict it just to 3. Bayesian statistics by definition needs priors, it's a central object in that approach, but even in the frequentist school of thought you need the hypothesis to come from outside (physics, economics, biology...) – at least when we're studying real phenomena, not just doing theoretical statistics. And statistics cannot even prove a theory being false – just highly unlikely. But if we agree that highly unlikely = false, then we may treat highly likely as true.
Are you asking about specific erep models? You will have to wait for the full analysis article for that 😉 But just a quick example could be the the formula for damage on the battlefield - you could assume a formula using strength, level, rank, or you could assume one with level and a random variable. You could then verify that there is a correlation with level, but actually if you assume the right formula you would see the level does not matter at all and it is only strength and rank that fully determine (cause) it.
I'd like to help with both kinds of data. Time zone is Eastern Time (United States).
I get the impression that the majority is European, so yours will be a valuable time zone 🙂
I want to participate in both and prefer the short version.
count me in
[removed]
I would like to help gathering economical information (UTC +1 / CET).
If it is of any help, I so far have recorded gold-offering-prices since 18th of October 2013 from Germany. I do not have used any sophisticated moment but just jotted down the price taken around 14:00.
However, I am excited to see what you have planned for us 🙂.
v
v o7
o7
o7
o7
Interesting indeed....
v
o/
nice
good
v
I voted and subbed for the "confirmation bias".
That is the sort of thing the public needs to hear more about.
v
o7
v