Probability Mass
P(X = 2) = 0.270671 for a Poisson with mean 2. For a continuous variable the same quantity is zero.
P(X = 2) = 0.270671 for a Poisson with mean 2. For a continuous variable the same quantity is zero.
Past 4, the normal gives 0.00006334 and the t gives 0.00357283. Same mean, same variance.
A point forecast is one summary of this. Once you keep the whole distribution, the decision can pick the summary it actually needs.
Reported without an interval, a forecast carries no way of telling how accurate it is — which is why a single line reads as certainty.
A discrete CDF is a staircase whose step heights are the masses. A continuous one has no steps, which is P(X = x) = 0.
An ensemble’s bias is the average of its members’ biases. Opposing biases can cancel; a shared directional bias remains.
Mean, naive, seasonal naive, drift: the simple methods a model has to beat on the same test set, origins, and horizons before its complexity is justified.
Always 40 units high: mean error -40.0000, AAE 40.0000. Unbiased but scattered: 0.0093 and 48.1484.
The value from the same season one period ago. Where it appears in the ACF, what seasonal differencing does with it, and why it is expensive in data.
Repeating the last value is not a placeholder. For a random walk it is optimal — which is why beating it is the first thing to demonstrate.
Minimizing MAE produces forecasts of the median; minimizing RMSE produces forecasts of the mean. The metric is a modeling choice, not a scorecard.
Four metrics, three orderings, two winners, from one set of forecasts over the same 3,000 series.
A calibrated continuous 90th percentile has 10% exceedance probability, not a guaranteed annual stockout count. Discrete demand can exceed it less often.
Interval width depends on the model and horizon. Coverage reflects the uncertainty represented in the model, not every possible change in the world.
Swap squared error for an asymmetric loss and the fitted line becomes a quantile. Three fits give you an interval with no normality assumption.
A quantile level selects a position in the outcome distribution. Exact exceedance probabilities require continuity; discrete outcomes can have ties.
Predicting the next values of a series. The benchmarks any method has to beat, and the evaluation that decides whether it did.
Removing half the remaining errors reads as 1.5000, 1.2143, 1.0556 and 1.0051 depending only on the majority class.
Training R² describes fit to observed data. Test R² evaluates predictions on new data; neither establishes causation, and either needs its definition stated.
95% is a property of the method, not of the interval in front of you. A higher level targets greater coverage across samples and usually widens the interval; it does not assign a posterior probability to the observed interval.
A regression tree whose leaves estimate treatment effects. The criterion that makes the splits, the sample split called honesty, and what it does not fix.
Trees that split on the effect of treating rather than on the outcome, averaged. The criteria that make the splits, and the interpretability it costs.
Cumulative incremental outcome against the share targeted. Why its vertical axis scales a difference of response rates into an incremental response count, and where to cut the campaign.
Likelihood compares parameter values for fixed observations. Ratios, constants, log calculations, and model assumptions determine its interpretation.
Pearson correlation measures linear association only. A coefficient near zero can sit on top of a perfect curved relationship.
Causal inference from observational data needs two things: data and identifiability conditions. Choosing a method does not establish the identification assumptions.
Square each error and average. Smooth to optimize and hard on big misses, but in squared units, so it is often reported as RMSE and minimized as MSE.
The median describes a typical case and cannot be summed. Both facts follow from it being a position rather than a balance point.
Means add and medians do not — which is why totals are built from means even when the median describes a typical case better.
60% against 56%, scaled from 1,000 rows to 100,000: chi-square goes 1.6420 to 164.2036 and p from 0.2000 to zero.
Moving 1% of the data out to six standard deviations gives D = 0.014000 and p = 0.828022. Not detected.
An optimal code for P costs 1 bit; a code for Q costs 1.736966 on samples from P. The 0.736966 gap is the KL.
Which test answers which question, from one-sample t to Fisher’s exact and Kolmogorov–Smirnov, how to choose by question, and the limits of a rejection.
A repeating pattern tied to the calendar. What separates it from a cycle, and why confusing the two produces forecasts the data never supported.
Power is not a property of a test but of a test plus an effect size you name. Without naming one, “underpowered” has no meaning.
A case-resampling bootstrap gives 0.015711 where DeLong’s closed form gives 0.015541.
Exact here means the coverage is guaranteed rather than approximated. The price is an interval that is wider, and not centered on your estimate.
The textbook proportion interval can put its lower bound below zero. Inverting the test instead gives bounds that stay inside the range.
The bootstrap gives you a sampling distribution for statistics that have no convenient formula. What it cannot give you is a fix for a biased sample.
JS reaches 0.693147 nats for disjoint supports. A parameter path that keeps them disjoint has a constant objective, unlike one that changes overlap.
Expected loss from shipping 0.137729, from holding 0.094212. The point estimate of 0.70 says ship.
Looking at a running experiment repeatedly, legitimately. What naive peeking does to the error rate, and how planned boundaries hold it.
95% describes the procedure across repeated samples, not your confidence in this particular interval. The distinction changes how you report it.
Sample size, effect size, α and power are four numbers with one equation. Fix any three and the fourth follows — which is the whole method.
Randomization makes groups comparable in expectation. Estimate assignment effects with uncertainty and check departures from the intended design.
Incremental revenue converted to contribution through the margin, with the campaign’s cost taken out, and the interval the result inherits.
The conversions a campaign caused, as opposed to the ones it was merely present for. What the scaling to a full population quietly assumes.
The incremental effect within the top k percent by predicted uplift — the number that matters when the campaign volume is already fixed.
The area under the uplift curve, reduced to a single number — by at least three different conventions that do not agree, on the same model and the same data.
A single number for an uplift model’s ranking, from the area above the random diagonal. The normalization changes it more than most model differences do.