≈

The passage around this formula

State in advance what each outcome would mean, so the test can be graded rather than argued with after the fact. To make the arithmetic concrete — using invented placeholder numbers only, to illustrate what the ratio means, not anything measured — suppose CfC’s Urban Patio baseline stayed at its published 67.5% while its measured $\mathrm{CAI}$ under the recolor intervention came back at 61%. That would give $\mathrm{RRR}(\mathrm{CfC})$ $\approx$ 0.90 : high, and hard to explain without the network actually tracking the target’s identity rather than its color. Suppose instead the same baseline of 67.5% paired with a measured $\mathrm{CAI}$ of 9%, most of those trials converging on the red decoy…

Read this part in the article →