Started By
Message

re: Mathematician- election numbers could not have occurred naturally

Posted on 1/28/21 at 10:57 pm to
Posted by TigersOfGeauxld
Just across the water...
Member since Aug 2009
25057 posts
Posted on 1/28/21 at 10:57 pm to
DEBUNKED

Reuters sought comment from experts regarding these claims.

quote:

Theodore P. Hill, Professor Emeritus of Mathematics at Georgia Tech, Atlanta, cautioned that regardless of the distribution uncovered, the application of Benford’s Law would not provide definitive evidence that fraud took place.

“First, I’d like to stress that Benford’s Law can NOT be used to “prove fraud”,” he told Reuters by email. “It is only a Red Flag test, that can raise doubts. E.g., the IRS has been using it for decades to ferret out fraudsters, but only by identifying suspicious entries, at which time they put the auditors to work on the hard evidence. Whether or not a dataset follows BL proves nothing.”

Walter Mebane, Professor at the Department of Political Science and Department of Statistics at the University of Michigan (here) authored a December 2006 article (here) around the application of Benford’s Law to the US presidential election results.

On Nov. 9, 2020, in response to “several queries” Mebane published a paper called “Inappropriate Applications of Benford’s Law Regularities to Some Data from the 2020 Presidential Election in the United States” (here). His paper says, “The displays shown at those sources using the first digits of precinct vote counts data from Fulton County, GA, Allegheny County, PA, Milwaukee, WI, and Chicago, IL, say nothing about possible frauds” before examining the reasons behind this statement.

“It is widely understood that the first digits of precinct vote counts are not useful for trying to diagnose election frauds,” he writes.


Reuters
Posted by Tiger985
Member since Nov 2006
6474 posts
Posted on 1/28/21 at 11:02 pm to
What this mathematician alleges has nothing to do with Benfords law dumbass.

Did you watch the video?

I don't know who the guy making the claim is or if his claim is true.

I can tell you it has nothing to do with Benfords law because I watched it.
Posted by ChineseBandit58
Pearland, TX
Member since Aug 2005
42872 posts
Posted on 1/28/21 at 11:36 pm to
quote:

First, I’d like to stress that Benford’s Law can NOT be used to “prove fraud”


This video had nothing to do with Benford's law - is this a response to the video in the OP or is it an old response to claims of Benford's law application from months ago.

quote:

Reuters sought comment from experts regarding these claims.
???

Benford's law is not as rigorous when applied to small numbers of potential voters, such as when there are many precincts with fewer than 500 votes in them. It is meant to analyze group patterns for much larger sample size. But even then, it has some applicability.
Posted by dgnx6
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2006
68952 posts
Posted on 1/29/21 at 7:26 am to
quote:

but only by identifying suspicious entries, at which time they put the auditors to work on the hard evidence.


Ahh, so did you read your own post?

This is exactly what didn't happen. And what wasn't allowed to happen.
Posted by moneyg
Member since Jun 2006
56744 posts
Posted on 1/29/21 at 7:41 am to
quote:

DEBUNKED

Reuters sought comment from experts regarding these claims.

quote:
Theodore P. Hill, Professor Emeritus of Mathematics at Georgia Tech, Atlanta, cautioned that regardless of the distribution uncovered, the application of Benford’s Law would not provide definitive evidence that fraud took place.






This has nothing to do with Benford's law. This is an analysis of election data.
Posted by TS1926
Alabama
Member since Jan 2020
5761 posts
Posted on 1/29/21 at 9:05 am to
quote:

First, I’d like to stress that Benford’s Law can NOT be used to “prove fraud”,” he told Reuters by email. “It is only a Red Flag test, that can raise doubts. E.g., the IRS has been using it for decades to ferret out fraudsters, but only by identifying suspicious entries, at which time they put the auditors to work on the hard evidence. Whether or not a dataset follows BL proves nothing.”


This is not accurate and I’m sure if we dig a little deeper, we will find the esteemed professor is a democrat hack.
Posted by dgnx6
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2006
68952 posts
Posted on 4/7/21 at 1:36 pm to
quote:

Walter Mebane, Professor at the Department of Political Science and Department of Statistics at the University of Michigan (here) authored a December 2006 article (here) around the application of Benford’s Law to the US presidential election results.



But in that article he says its used to detect fraud.

quote:

Note that our results are by no means direct proof of electoral fraud-they signal that the election data is compatible with the widespread occurrence of such types of fraud and that the data does not allow us to rule out ballot stuffing and voter rigging



Boom
This post was edited on 4/7/21 at 1:37 pm
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram