/sci/ - Science & Math

If you have fair and rigged Benford models then sure why not?

>>12310621
Stop making this thread retard, or at least read the Wikipedia page first.
>"...we find that conformity with and deviations from Benford's Law follow no pattern. It is not simply that the Law occasionally judges a fraudulent election fair or a fair election fraudulent. Its “success rate” either way is essentially equivalent to a toss of a coin, thereby rendering it problematical at best as a forensic tool and wholly misleading at worst."

https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpr014

>>12310693
https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpr024.. Also that wikipedia entry got edited in right after the original dude on twitter ran his computations. cope more

>>12310693

It is true that there are many [maaaaaaaaany] time series that do not follow this distribution.

How funny that every candidate votes but Biden follow it, and that the past democrat counts also. :-)

>>12312727
"Whether the tests are useful for detecting fraud remains an open question"

>>12310621
Can you put Trump's for comparison

>>12312766
nvm, i'm blind

>>12312255
>>12312264
Please read the other threads on this topic and stop posting about it

>>12310621
The virgin benford follower VS the Chad Democratic Rollercoaster.

Guys, an anonymous edit to wikipedia has already debunked this. Stop talking about it.

>>12310621
>We use Benford's law that is actually an approximation of an statistical phenomenon that may pop up sometimes.
>Biden ballots don't follow it
>We already know that Benford's law is hardly absolute
/pol/ conclusion:
ELECTIONS RIGGGED. DEMOCRATS VOTE FRAUDING. TRUMP 2020 TRUUMPPPPPPPPPPP OUR ALT-RIGHT EMPEROR

There are still at least two other threads discussing this. Enough, homo.

>>12310621
there was a sting operation set up by the Trump administration to watermark the ballots. They are going to catch the commie dems regardless

>>12312794
>BA
>SA
>DO

>>12310693

>>12312736
Yeah that was edited apparently

Refuting Maga tards on this Benford shit implies educating them. It's a lost cause.

>>12310621
It simply proves it yet

>>12312794

>>12313545
I remember this image from 2010

>>12313547
I remember you from 2010, anon. How have you been this past decade?

>>12310834
actually the opposite happened. that has been part of the wiki entry for benford's law for years, then after that twitter post people started editing it out

>>12312811
C'mon man! It's evidence, not proof. Don't act like Bedford's law is the only anomaly.

>>12312822
retarded wigger abbo europoid

even if there was a sting operation the rest of the gov would be in on it

the fact that trump is getting dumped by mitch mcconnell, fox news, and every other republican you can see, means that he has no power anymore. Even if the election was rigged, it was rigged with the consent of republicans

>>12310621
It was enough to take down Enron

>>12313719
>Even if the election was rigged, it was rigged with the consent of republicans
yes
This is not democrats versus republicans, it's establishment versus Trump

>>12312736
That's an oddly specific note

>>12313724
Establishment wants to maintain itself
Neither side really likes trump, and their entire authority is now under question
They have no choice but to turn on him

God i love watching all this conservative cope. This is even better than the liberal tears from 2016. it's fucking glorious.

>>12312794
kek, im gonna deboooooooooonk

>>12312857
lol
>QUICK, CHANGE THE DEFINITIONS

>>12314228
lmao
>I'M GONNA DEBOOOOOOOONK

>>12313724
This. It's the reason dems didn't try to also rig the house and senate seats. They had Republicans consent. Republicans know how to rig too and would out them for treason.

>>12314933
dems sounds like demons haha

>>12310621
No you just need to calculate 2 to the power of what ever vote was purely for one candidate. But this allow might helps you find the cheated letters.
But you don't need it to proof it.

>>12314951
"auto-correction corrected my shit to unreadable"
Benfords law might allow you to fight the cheated votes faster as if you have to check everyone.

>>12310621

Can someone explain what numbers they’re using for calculation? Total votes per county or what?

>>12310621
I don't believe in Benford's law. I think it's used to cloud the power of normal distribution.

>>12313658
No, it's not evidence any more than a coin toss is.

>>12310621
no

>>12310621
Yes, if you look at precinct data in heavy Dem districts, at the presidential vote level
>>12310693
Crunch the numbers yourself, I have as per pic related. The RSS isn't on your side

>>12316468
what a retarded thing to say

>>12316481
>https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpr014
"Its “success rate” either way is essentially equivalent to a toss of a coin, thereby rendering it problematical at best as a forensic tool and wholly misleading at worst."

>>12310693
>>12316483
>https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpr014
>This essay

>>12313658
>empirically, some datasets appear to follow this distribution
>therefore failure to follow it is evidence of electoral fraud
I don't ask this to be rude, but do you know what "evidence" means?

>>12313655
Low-quality shill. Maybe post an image of that next time

>>12316683
I was in washington DC once which is evidence that I committed every murder in washington DC during the time I was there.

>>12310693
Midwit take.
Many attempts have been made to disprove benfords law becuase it doesn’t “feel” right to midwits. But it’s even used in court cases.
I bet you can’t even write the proof for benfords law. Don’t criticize what you don’t understand

>>12312811
>We already know that Benford's law is hardly absolute
Not true.
>>12312736
> "Whether the tests are useful for detecting fraud remains an open question
Not true

>>12310621
It could not definitely prove it but it could indicate irregularities IF APPLIED TO A LARGE SAMPLE.
A few hundred precincts is much too small of a sample to conclusively rule out random chance as the reason for the distributions in the OP image.
Pic related shows some randomly generated samples of size 500 that were generated with a multinomial distribution following Benford's law.