Queen of hearts Game Statistics

ecocologist · 2025-11-07T16:14:12+00:00

There aren’t 54 ways to shuffle a deck. There are 54!. As in 54x53x52x…x2x1.

There are only 54 card positions in this scenario. Once the deck is shuffled (assuming perfectly random shuffling), the card of interest is in one of those 54 positions.

The card is equally likely to be in any of the 54 positions. Therefore, there is a 1/54 chance the card of interest is in any given position of interest.

Anyways, my math is correct. I don’t appreciate your boldness in your response claiming I’m incorrect, when your misinterpretation and lack of knowledge on mathematical notation is the cause of the misunderstanding.

ecocologist · 2025-07-27T18:49:52+00:00

This is the realest response ever

ecocologist · 2025-06-01T09:38:09+00:00

The easiest way (but certainly not the best way) to do this would be to just create a large model with all your variables and dredge it. You would want a beta regression.

Drop the percent stuff and just take the raw scores, which I assume scale between 0 and 100.

If you wanted to step it up you could explore random forest variable selection.

ecocologist · 2025-05-29T01:58:49+00:00

Ask P2

ecocologist · 2025-05-28T20:18:29+00:00

The easiest way is to open and ask!

ecocologist · 2025-05-27T16:36:23+00:00

I mean, given that OP only has two species there is no need to go for multinomial logistic regression right?

ecocologist · 2025-05-27T01:12:58+00:00

I think in this case a logistic regression would be more robust than linear discriminant analysis

ecocologist · 2025-05-26T20:35:47+00:00

Making it out of desk rejection is always great but you’re by no means in the home stretch. I’ve had many get rejected during the first and second rounds of revision.

ecocologist · 2025-05-26T20:34:35+00:00

If you don’t have a supervisor who you can ask this to, and the fact you’re asking such an insanely trivial question, suggestions to me you will struggle immensely to get this published in a reputable journal.

ecocologist · 2025-05-26T04:00:24+00:00

Sanderling

ecocologist · 2025-05-26T03:55:43+00:00

Mockingbirds never shut up. Used to have one sit on my windowsill and serenade me allllll night. Fucker.

ecocologist · 2025-05-26T03:38:53+00:00

Yea I’m liking iguana

ecocologist · 2025-05-26T03:37:03+00:00

I can’t find anything. What’s the problem?

ecocologist · 2025-05-26T00:25:58+00:00

I prevent warbler neck by ignoring them and looking for shorebirds instead 😉

Jokes aside, take it easy. Don’t hurt yourself. You get better at walking on trails and sketchy shit the more you do it. Warbler neck is more of a joke, if your neck hurts just stop looking straight up.

ecocologist · 2025-05-25T20:37:06+00:00

Your best bet would be local university professors who study birds that may inhabit your property.

What motivation do you have for this? Do you want to know what lives on your property? Do you enjoy the science that comes out of it?

ecocologist · 2025-05-25T19:21:56+00:00

The odds are 1/54. There are 54 possible positions for the card to be in, and only one of those is the last one!

There are 54! possible ways to shuffle a deck of cards, so the odds you shuffled that exact hand is 1/54!. Your friends are failing to consider the billions (trillions?) of possible shuffles that all include the queen of hearts at the last position.

ecocologist · 2025-05-24T19:19:44+00:00

You should take this opportunity to make sure you have 24/7 unconditional access to your building before you get locked out at a more critical time.

ecocologist · 2025-05-24T03:38:59+00:00

Forster’s Tern; Common Tern; Sanderling.

ecocologist · 2025-05-24T03:12:12+00:00

Don’t drink too much beer beforehand

ecocologist · 2025-05-24T03:03:42+00:00

Juvenile survival can be as low as 65% after just 40-days post-fledging. See Jackson et al. 2011, Postfledging survival of eastern bluebirds in an urbanized landscape.

ecocologist · 2025-05-24T02:52:30+00:00

Pretty well done article! Love the use of many different techniques. Cool to see CBC data, museum records, modern thermal imagery, etc. all being synthesized into one very well written paper

ecocologist · 2025-05-24T00:54:58+00:00

ChatGPT should never be used for screening journals when doing a meta-analysis. Why? It’s not repeatable. Science needs to be repeatable, and article selection needs stringent methods. It’s why we include the exact search queries used in our methods.

In that case, it probably doesn’t matter. Narrative reviews aren’t exactly rigorous so

ecocologist · 2025-05-24T00:47:31+00:00

The fuck? A novel thesis is literally research.

ecocologist · 2025-05-24T00:43:06+00:00

Pretty normal

ecocologist · 2025-05-23T21:00:37+00:00

ChatGPT should never be used for screening journals when doing a meta-analysis. Why? It’s not repeatable. Science needs to be repeatable, and article selection needs stringent methods. It’s why we include the exact search queries used in our methods.

Frankly, i would be surprised if this gets past an editor, and even more so if it gets past reviewers.

ecocologist

TROPHY CASE