1
$\begingroup$

How should I re-write my question to have it re-opened?

Here is the question, which was closed today: comparing entities by their three different parameters

||||||
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I don't know why it was closed--but it certainly isn't about mathematical-statistics! Consider applying relevant tags. $\endgroup$ – whuber Dec 19 '19 at 15:10
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I didn't (cannot) vote for closure, but it seems to me like a puzzle problem, or HW problem. and didn't show efforts to solve it (?) $\endgroup$ – ankii Dec 19 '19 at 15:47
  • $\begingroup$ Upon reading it through, I cannot find an answerable question. I posted an explanatory comment in that thread. $\endgroup$ – whuber Dec 19 '19 at 20:09
  • $\begingroup$ @whuber - I just posted an answer to your comment there. $\endgroup$ – brilliant Dec 20 '19 at 8:42
3
$\begingroup$

Your question has several aspects and it is unclear what statistical topic/problem you are aiming at with the question. You should narrow it down, or at least the problem statement could be more concise/isolated. (if it is about how to incorporate those many aspects into the problem then this can be done, but currently it is unclear what the basic problem is)

1

Your question has a big problem here

as many cards as possible by opening as few boxes as possible

it is already not clear who wins even when the timers working correctly. (I guess that you meant the person with the most cards wins, and the 'few boxes as possible' is the strategy to do it, but you should clarify that)


2

The problem is not complete (as with many practical/story statistics problems), but it is too abstract (no clear context) that allows people to fill in the gaps.

...the timers for rooms B and C had not been set up accurately ... we already need to decide the winner on the basis of the present results.

There is no single solution to this problem and there will be different approaches possible. In the current state it is much too broad and it is unclear what the culprit is of your long question (what is the key problem/issue?). How should answers decide on that? It would help if you would give more guidelines what is desired and especially it would be nice if the question could be made to focus on a smaller problem or when the task/objective is mvd more clear.


To me your question reads as

alice and bob are doing a beauty contest, they have to dress up within 1 hour, alice has three pretty flowers in her hair and bob has two nice cufflinks, but bob finished within 50 minutes due to an error with the clock. Who wins?

It is very vague to decide who wins and the underlying statistical problem, if there is any, is not exposed in such complex question.


Possibly this question (given to you as an exercise?) is about Pareto efficiency, or something related. Then it is meant to make you think and realize that: if there is no single person with both the least boxes and most cards, then there is no clear solution possible when you do not make a decision how to differentiate. (and the problem with the timers is adding more spice into the mix and allows you to ponder about different objectives, fairness/stability/mean utility/etc., that can be optimized).

But that efficiency and objectives is speculation about your question. It would greatly help if you explain the background of your question, where it comes from and why you try to answer it, in order for people here to guess the meaning of the questions and such that they do not need to speculate.

||||||
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ (1) First of all, thank you for your time and for such a detailed answer. “it is already not clear who wins even when the timers working correctly” – That’s, in fact, what my whole question is all about. By the end of the competition each contestant comes up with at least two results (for a moment let’s just assume that they all spend equal amounts of time to complete their tasks): the result B, that is, the number of boxes he has opened, and the result C, that is, the number of cards he has gathered. $\endgroup$ – brilliant Dec 20 '19 at 10:20
  • $\begingroup$ (2) Because each contestant has two numbers as a result, instead of just one number (like that would be, say, in racing), I don’t know how to decide the winner. I mean, if we have only two contestants with B1 smaller than B2, and with C1 bigger than C2, then it’s clear that contestant 1 is the winner. However, what if I have three contenders? Than, how am I supposed to decide who the loser is, who takes the second place and who the winner is? $\endgroup$ – brilliant Dec 20 '19 at 10:21
  • $\begingroup$ (3) Should I divide B by C in each case and then compare the quotients ( B1/C1 ~ B2/C2 ~ B3/C3 )? Or should I compare the C/B quotients ( C1/B1 ~ C2/B2 ~ C3/B3 )? Or, perhaps, should I compare the averages ( (C1+B1)/2 ~ (C2+B2)/2 ~ (C3+B3)/2 )? Or should I, perhaps, come up with some other formula that would also involve the number of boxes in each room, which 40, and the number of cards in each room, which is 840 (1+2+3+4+5+6+7+…+37+38+39+60 = 840)? $\endgroup$ – brilliant Dec 20 '19 at 10:21
  • $\begingroup$ @brilliant your problem does not sound like a statistics question. It seems, for the moment, more like a game-theory to me. So there are two elements missing. 1) the question is missing the link with statistics and this needs to be explained (when I first saw the question and was wondering why you post it here I was imagining that maybe you wanted to incorporate some computations of randomness and probability into your analysis). ..... $\endgroup$ – Sextus Empiricus Dec 20 '19 at 14:09
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ ....2) The questions is missing information (no sufficient information to answer: should you divide or do something else... it depends on what you want). Without information there is no way to decide how to decide. It is of course possible that you have troubles with expressing this information as you may not know what sort of information is neccesary. But something that should be easy is explaining why/whatfor you have this question. If you explain the background then people might infer the information from that or provide you with more directed questions that ask you for this information. $\endgroup$ – Sextus Empiricus Dec 20 '19 at 14:11
  • $\begingroup$ I see. Thank you. I am working now on re-writing my question using the points you've brought up. I firstly asked this question on math.se ( math.stackexchange.com/questions/3480917/… ) and later was told that math deals more with consequences rather than a process. I didn't understand what it meant. Later the question was closed there, so I came here because I thought it was more related to statistical analysis. $\endgroup$ – brilliant Dec 20 '19 at 14:18
  • $\begingroup$ @moderators - I have just re-written my question. Please, re-open it. $\endgroup$ – brilliant Dec 22 '19 at 16:10
  • $\begingroup$ @brilliant, you should note that it is not a guarantee for reopening. (is it about statistics now?) $\endgroup$ – Sextus Empiricus Dec 22 '19 at 17:18

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .