Summary: almost all the GameScience dice I looked at passed chi-square testing fine, with one exception:\u00a0the “D16 Transparent Ice Blue Gamescience Gem Die”, which failed miserably.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
I ordered this stuff from G2 Collectibles and Hobbies:<\/p>\n
1 x Gamescience Precision RPG Dice Set Opaque White 7pc () = $9.99<\/p>\n
1 x D16 Transparent Ice Blue Gamescience Gem Die () = $5.99<\/p>\n
1 x D10 Opaque Green Gamescience Precision Die () = $1.39<\/p>\n
1 x D4 (8 Sided) Opaque Red Gamescience Die () = $1.99<\/p>\n
1 x D5 (10 Sided) Opaque Blue Gamescience Die () = $2.99<\/p>\n
\n
And subjected them to chi-square testing– rolling them N times, computing the chi-square critical value, and using http:\/\/stattrek.com\/Tables\/ChiSquare.aspx<\/a> to look up the corresponding cumulative probability.<\/p>\n\n
| Description<\/th> | N<\/th> | df<\/th> | CV<\/th> | P(X^2 < CV)<\/th> | Stat. sig.?<\/th>\n\t<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Die #1: white d4<\/td> | 100<\/td> | 3<\/td> | .48<\/td> | .03<\/td> | <\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #2: white d6<\/td> | 120<\/td> | 5<\/td> | 4.4<\/td> | .51<\/td> | <\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #3: white d8<\/td> | 160<\/td> | 7<\/td> | 12.5<\/td> | .92<\/td> | Yes<\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #3: white d8<\/td> | 80<\/td> | 7<\/td> | .6<\/td> | .001<\/td> | No<\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #3: white d8<\/td> | 80<\/td> | 7<\/td> | 4.0<\/td> | .22<\/td> | No<\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #3: white d8<\/td> | 120<\/td> | 7<\/td> | 7.7<\/td> | .64<\/td> | No<\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #4: red octahedron labeled 1-4; a \"d4 on a d8\"<\/td> | 160<\/td> | 3<\/td> | 3.6<\/td> | .69<\/td> | <\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #5: white d10 labeled 00-90<\/td> | 70<\/td> | 9<\/td> | 11.1<\/td> | .73<\/td> | <\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #5: white d10 labeled 00-90<\/td> | 200<\/td> | 9<\/td> | 6.2<\/td> | .28<\/td> | <\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #6: white d10 labeled 0-9<\/td> | 70<\/td> | 9<\/td> | 5.7<\/td> | .23<\/td> | <\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #6: white d10 labeled 0-9<\/td> | 200<\/td> | 9<\/td> | 7.0<\/td> | .36<\/td> | <\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #7: green d10 labeled 0-9<\/td> | 70<\/td> | 9<\/td> | 10.6<\/td> | .69<\/td> | <\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #7: green d10 labeled 0-9<\/td> | 100<\/td> | 9<\/td> | 4.8<\/td> | .15<\/td> | <\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #8: blue d10 labeled 1-5-- a \"d5 on a d10\"<\/td> | 100<\/td> | 4<\/td> | 2.5<\/td> | .36<\/td> | <\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #9: white d12<\/td> | 120<\/td> | 11<\/td> | 14.0<\/td> | .77<\/td> | Marginal<\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #9: white d12<\/td> | 120<\/td> | 11<\/td> | 5.4<\/td> | .09<\/td> | No<\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #10: ice blue d16<\/td> | 120<\/td> | 15<\/td> | 24.0<\/td> | .94<\/td> | Yes<\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #10: ice blue d16<\/td> | 160<\/td> | 15<\/td> | 27.2<\/td> | .97<\/td> | Yes<\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n\t |
| Die #11: white d20<\/td> | 200<\/td> | 19<\/td> | 13.8<\/td> | .21<\/td> | <\/td>\n\t<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n The white d8 gave me a bit of a scare, but retesting seems to indicate that first result was, in fact, just bad luck. \u00a0The d12 didn’t really need a retest, but I did one anyway; it passed fine. \u00a0The d16 is unquestionably broken. \u00a0Examining the raw data showed (among other things) that it rolled fourteen only seven times out of two hundred and eighty; examining the die itself showed (A) a not-unexpected minor sprue mark on the one side, and (B) a significant burr sticking out of the three side, directly opposite the fourteen. \u00a0(The die may be reparable– but that’s a separate question.)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Summary: almost all the GameScience dice I looked at passed chi-square testing fine, with one exception:\u00a0the “D16 Transparent Ice Blue Gamescience Gem Die”, which failed miserably.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[9],"tags":[95,94,96],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/stephan-zielinski.com\/dwa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/810"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/stephan-zielinski.com\/dwa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/stephan-zielinski.com\/dwa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/stephan-zielinski.com\/dwa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/stephan-zielinski.com\/dwa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=810"}],"version-history":[{"count":17,"href":"http:\/\/stephan-zielinski.com\/dwa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/810\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":827,"href":"http:\/\/stephan-zielinski.com\/dwa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/810\/revisions\/827"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/stephan-zielinski.com\/dwa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=810"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/stephan-zielinski.com\/dwa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=810"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/stephan-zielinski.com\/dwa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=810"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}} |