• TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Oh a masters thesis? Oh WOW 😲😳!

    If you don’t immediately see the issue in the above statement, then Google Pearsons correlation coefficient and spend a little time reading.

    It should be glaringly obvious why the statement made is both true, and also utterly devoid of meaning. If it’s not, look at what a bonferroni adjustment is and why it’s important when calculating multiple statistics as is being done here.

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        “Only two out of twenty tokens have correlations beneath this threshold, namely McDonald’s Corporation and Gamestop Corporation with respective correlation coefficients of 0,79 and 0,93.”

        That rate of correlations being below that threshold, 1-in-20, is exactly the rate at which you would expect to get a false positive correlation at that cut off. Because they’re comparing multiple statistics (multiple tests), they need account for that, which is where a Bonferroni adjustment would come in into play. You have to account for the fact that you’re comparing multiple statistics simultaneously, so based on randomness alone, some will come as significant even when they arent. Posting random pages from a students MA thesis is, well, just kinda sad. I’m sorry you lack basic statistical literacy. I’ve given you some material you can use to correct that.

        • AnimorphFan1996@lemmy.whynotdrs.orgOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          you don’t understand statistics […] spend a little time reading […] It should be glaringly obvious […] utterly devoid of meaning […] Posting random pages […] just kinda sad […] you lack basic statistical literacy

          You are being rude, and this idiosyncrasy is significant. I will try to explain for you in simple terms. Although the price of a stock varies over time, at any given time, the price should be approximately the same across brokers. (And for tokenized stocks to substitute for non-tokenized stocks, then their prices also need to correspond.) When I buy a stock on Charles Schwab, then the price should be the same as when you buy the same stock on Fidelity. If you get a different price from me, higher or lower, then the price of the stock is wrong. No Bonferroni correction necessary. It doesn’t matter whether this happens for every stock or just one idiosyncratic stock. If the price is different, then the price is wrong.

          • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            When I buy a stock on Charles Schwab, then the price should be the same as when you buy the same stock on Fidelity. If you get a different price from me, higher or lower, then the price of the stock is wrong.

            Tell me you dont understand how a market works without telling me you dont understand how a market works.

            • AnimorphFan1996@lemmy.whynotdrs.orgOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              National best bid and offer

              National Best Bid and Offer (NBBO) is a regulation by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission that requires brokers to execute customer trades at the best available (lowest) ask price when buying securities, and the best available (highest) bid price when selling securities, as governed by Regulation NMS.

        • Chives@lemmy.whynotdrs.orgM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          Speaking as someone who is not an expert in statistics - next time, please include information on what is wrong (or being misinterpreted) in the initial comment. I’m sure we’ll all be able to better improve our understandings that way.