What number do you live at?
- Thread starter Bahco
- Start date
It is interesting. You might expect the distribution of claims to match the distribution of house numbers - the null hypothesis. If that was the case, and assuming that every street starts with a "No 1" and streets have different numbers of houses, you would expect lower numbers to come out top in claims. It doesn't appear to work that way.
Assuming this is a significantly significant observation, you might explain it by saying higher house numbers are found in more densely populated areas (terraces and flats). More densely populated areas have more crime, and more crime means more insurance claims.
Assuming this is a significantly significant observation, you might explain it by saying higher house numbers are found in more densely populated areas (terraces and flats). More densely populated areas have more crime, and more crime means more insurance claims.
They might be, but the data provided suggests they aren't, but without the whole data it's not possible to say. Common sense would say they aren't random.
Well only 10 house numbers are given.
Is the 'bit of variation' you see significant?
disregarding the house numbers and just looking at regions, it says
In London, ....19.2 per cent
Scottish Borders ...18.1 per cent.
southern part ...28 per cent
so a particular house number or street name within that sort of range is not worth writing a newspaper article about, unless you had nothing else to do.
In London, ....19.2 per cent
Scottish Borders ...18.1 per cent.
southern part ...28 per cent
so a particular house number or street name within that sort of range is not worth writing a newspaper article about, unless you had nothing else to do.
i personally think this artical is flawed
there must be 10 to 20 times more say 1- 10 numbers than say 150-159
you have a street with say 40 houses and 5 blocks off flats each flat is numbered say 1-12 thats 6 number 1 6 number 2 ect with all other numers being represented only once if at all
i wonder what pecentage off streets actually reach 166 most will stop before reaching 166 i would have thought
there must be 10 to 20 times more say 1- 10 numbers than say 150-159
you have a street with say 40 houses and 5 blocks off flats each flat is numbered say 1-12 thats 6 number 1 6 number 2 ect with all other numers being represented only once if at all
i wonder what pecentage off streets actually reach 166 most will stop before reaching 166 i would have thought
i personally think this artical is flawed
there must be 10 to 20 times more say 1- 10 numbers than say 150-159
you have a street with say 40 houses and 5 blocks off flats each flat is numbered say 1-12 thats 6 number 1 6 number 2 ect with all other numers being represented only once if at all
i wonder what pecentage off streets actually reach 166 most will stop before reaching 166 i would have thought
I'm with you on this one BA
i personally think this artical is flawed
there must be 10 to 20 times more say 1- 10 numbers than say 150-159
you have a street with say 40 houses and 5 blocks off flats each flat is numbered say 1-12 thats 6 number 1 6 number 2 ect with all other numers being represented only once if at all
i wonder what pecentage off streets actually reach 166 most will stop before reaching 166 i would have thought
I'm with you on this one BA
aaahhh just realised they are talking percentage of a specific numbers as in number 1 may =3% off the total at say100000 number 166 may only be use 1000 or 0.03 percent off the total or 100 times less but as a percentage off that group size is 21.8 or around 22 houses where as number 1 at 2100 would be a smaller pecentage even though 100 times the size
P
peaps2
we don't have a number
Buck House??
Similar threads
