20100604, 22:19  #1 
Account Deleted
"Tim Sorbera"
Aug 2006
San Antonio, TX USA
17·251 Posts 
Amusing stats: luckiness of NPLB members
I was wondering if I was luckier than most people in how many primes I find for my work.
How do I define "lucky"? With statistics, of course. I compare the ratio of prime scores to pair scores. So if you get more primes than you "should", that number will be higher, and if you get less, it will be lower. I've attached the results. (I know something trying to calculate the chances of primes would be more accurate than comparing against other people, but that would be much harder and only a little more accurate.) I calculated the scores signifying luckiness as Prime Score / Pair Score * 100000. (using data from the NPLB database as of the 20100604 16:09:46 update) I included both a CSV with all users, and one only including users that have searched at least 5000 pairs, to eliminate most 0 scores and any anamolous results (e.g. Razor_FX_II's 57 score). I also included the full ODS file, which displays the scores to a higher precision and has a graph and stuff. Of the ones with at least 5000 pairs searched, (51 people) here are the min, Q1, median, Q3, and max scores: 0.0000, 14.4503, 18.5166, 21.4824, 36.3916. I'm at the 76th percentile. So yes, I am luckier than the average prime searcher. More trivia: gd_barnes and kar_bon are quite average, at 46th and 50th percentile, respectively. mdettweiler is unlucky, at the 20th percentile. Last fiddled with by MiniGeek on 20100604 at 22:30 
20100604, 23:55  #2 
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT5)
14151_{8} Posts 

20100605, 01:35  #3 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(3,3^1118781+1)/3
2·7·647 Posts 
“The more I practice, the luckier I get.” /Gary Player/
Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20100605 at 20:47 Reason: request from Batalov to edit 
20100605, 09:14  #4 
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT)
7×811 Posts 
I am 42nd percentile. I am in a huge prime gap for all projects(top 5000). I have done lots of searching at both NPLB and CRUS in the top 5000 range and have found nothing. Thats excluding the work I did on my own in the rieselprimedatabase subforum which I have failed to find any top 5000 primes for since this started.

20100605, 20:48  #5 
May 2007
Kansas; USA
10150_{10} Posts 
I got an Email request from Batalov to edit his post in this thread. That has now been done.

20100605, 21:05  #6 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(3,3^1118781+1)/3
2·7·647 Posts 
Yes, thanks,  I was looking for a thought and found a totally wrong way of expressing it, initially. Gary Player has got it right.

20100611, 13:12  #7  
Account Deleted
"Tim Sorbera"
Aug 2006
San Antonio, TX USA
17×251 Posts 
With this prime:
Quote:
This move actually brings the list as a whole closer to what should be expected if the primes are normally distributed between everybody. If the data are normally distributed, we expect about b% of the values to lie within a standard deviations of the mean. It is now c%, before this change it was d%. Code:
a b% c% d% 1 68.27% 68.63% 70.59% 2 95.45% 92.16% 90.20% 3 99.73% 100.00% 100.00% If I had found 1 prime so far in my individual k work, I would be just above the average, with a score of 20.4967036288. 72nd percentile, but only 2.17 points, or 0.27 std devs, up from the mean. Those big primes make a big difference, even with someone like me who has a significant amount of work behind it. Last fiddled with by MiniGeek on 20100611 at 13:23 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Team members  henryzz  Game 2  ♚♛♝♞♜♟  Toxic Geckos  0  20130722 09:19 
Team members  henryzz  Game 1  ♔♕♙♘♖♙  Toxic Geckos  0  20121004 15:46 
New members  em99010pepe  No Prime Left Behind  40  20100517 14:34 
NPLB FreeDC Stats  em99010pepe  No Prime Left Behind  117  20090403 08:26 
Can I finish another team members LL test?  petrw1  PrimeNet  3  20071105 20:58 