Vman do you have any knowledge of the machine, audit/check/verification/inspection, whatever they call it in a State like NV, actually consists of?
One poster on another site thought for a game like VP they hook up a computer to a machine,run a bazillion hands and the results better be close to the ER for the game. Far fetched or possible?
New machines unplayable.
-
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 1375
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 1:21 pm
-
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 1806
- Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 4:02 am
My numbers may be off, but I think it might actually be 1.7 bazillion.
-
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 1375
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 1:21 pm
Vman,Gronbog, and New.
We are blessed with a wealth of Math. Wizards.
We are blessed with a wealth of Math. Wizards.
-
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 3288
- Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:49 am
That is one thing they can do. Examine the final outcome output distribution to the total distribution or Chi-Square test. Plus a number of other tests listed on page 44 of this PDF document which is GLI-11 v. 3.0 which many jurisdictions model their regulations from.tech58 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 14, 2020 9:16 amVman do you have any knowledge of the machine, audit/check/verification/inspection, whatever they call it in a State like NV, actually consists of?
One poster on another site thought for a game like VP they hook up a computer to a machine,run a bazillion hands and the results better be close to the ER for the game. Far fetched or possible?
https://www.gamingboardbahamas.com/img/ ... 20V3.0.pdf
Unfortunately I'm not very well versed in chi square tests to explain in layman's terms other than it's a test to see how close data ends up falling within expectation.
Here's wiki on it. But it's even tough for me to understand. Bleh.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-squared_test
-
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 1375
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 1:21 pm
Thanks Vman. Your first sentence squarely answered my question.
From there, i am reading and taking notes.
However, if it is "tough" for you,imagine me, deep in the weeds.
From there, i am reading and taking notes.
However, if it is "tough" for you,imagine me, deep in the weeds.
-
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 1806
- Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 4:02 am
Chi-squared test in layman's terms:
Answer the question: Do the results from a sample line up close enough to what is expected?
Here's an example. Let's look at 1300 cards at random and record the number of each rank. We would expect 100 Aces, 100 Kings, ... , down to 100 deuces. With any sample, it would be incredibly coincidental to get that exact distribution. Here is how the test would work. Let's say the sample looked like this:
Ace 103
King 93
Queen 96
Jack 111
Ten 116
Nine 93
Eight 96
Seven 92
Six 98
Five 95
Four 103
Three 95
Two 109
What we do for each of the above frequency numbers would be to see a measure of how far each number is from 100 (the expectation). For Aces, that calculation is (103 - 100)^2 / 100 = 0.09; for Tens, it would be (116 - 100)^2 / 100 = 2.56; for Sevens it would be (92 - 100)^2 / 100 = 0.64. Do this calculation for each of the 13 ranks and sum the results you get 7.24. Since this number is smaller than what is called a critical value for this particular test, 21.03; this result would not reject the idea that the ranks were selected randomly with equal probability fo reach rank.
In order to explain how the number 21.03 was chosen, we need to go beyond a layman's explanation.
Here is a different example:
Ace 83
King 85
Queen 102
Jack 75
Ten 107
Nine 99
Eight 87
Seven 113
Six 100
Five 105
Four 120
Three 121
Two 103
In this one, the sum of the calculations works out so that it fails the chi-squared test; i.e., it is greater than 21.03.
Of course, if I was doing this for a regulatory agency, like tech58 originally said, I would use a sample size higher than 1300, though we might stop shy of 1.7 bazillion. And we would likely measure more than just the counts of the ranks of the cards.
I don't have any particular knowledge of how various jurisdictions actually do their auditing. There are lots more tests for randomness that are likely employed. You could look up Marsaglia Diehard tests if you were interested in seeing some examples of other tests.
Also, there actually is a similar question answered in the Ask the Experts section of the Pro Training feature on this website in case anyone is interested in doing additional exploration.
Answer the question: Do the results from a sample line up close enough to what is expected?
Here's an example. Let's look at 1300 cards at random and record the number of each rank. We would expect 100 Aces, 100 Kings, ... , down to 100 deuces. With any sample, it would be incredibly coincidental to get that exact distribution. Here is how the test would work. Let's say the sample looked like this:
Ace 103
King 93
Queen 96
Jack 111
Ten 116
Nine 93
Eight 96
Seven 92
Six 98
Five 95
Four 103
Three 95
Two 109
What we do for each of the above frequency numbers would be to see a measure of how far each number is from 100 (the expectation). For Aces, that calculation is (103 - 100)^2 / 100 = 0.09; for Tens, it would be (116 - 100)^2 / 100 = 2.56; for Sevens it would be (92 - 100)^2 / 100 = 0.64. Do this calculation for each of the 13 ranks and sum the results you get 7.24. Since this number is smaller than what is called a critical value for this particular test, 21.03; this result would not reject the idea that the ranks were selected randomly with equal probability fo reach rank.
In order to explain how the number 21.03 was chosen, we need to go beyond a layman's explanation.
Here is a different example:
Ace 83
King 85
Queen 102
Jack 75
Ten 107
Nine 99
Eight 87
Seven 113
Six 100
Five 105
Four 120
Three 121
Two 103
In this one, the sum of the calculations works out so that it fails the chi-squared test; i.e., it is greater than 21.03.
Of course, if I was doing this for a regulatory agency, like tech58 originally said, I would use a sample size higher than 1300, though we might stop shy of 1.7 bazillion. And we would likely measure more than just the counts of the ranks of the cards.
I don't have any particular knowledge of how various jurisdictions actually do their auditing. There are lots more tests for randomness that are likely employed. You could look up Marsaglia Diehard tests if you were interested in seeing some examples of other tests.
Also, there actually is a similar question answered in the Ask the Experts section of the Pro Training feature on this website in case anyone is interested in doing additional exploration.
-
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 1375
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 1:21 pm
Dang,New. I could actually follow that! Thanks.
Am claiming promotion to "Layman"
Am claiming promotion to "Layman"
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 319
- Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 2:38 pm
-
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 1375
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 1:21 pm
First experience,legally that is, yet to come.
Actually DE, "deep in the weeds", is a term i have heard several Chefs use to describe timing disasters in restaurant kitchens.
Any word from the Eagle yet?
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 319
- Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 2:38 pm
No updates since the Gov extended our house arrest to Apr 30.