Symbol c
c is part of the quantity the equation computes from the expression on the right.
Read this term in its guide →Published equation contexts
Solving for the minimum defect correlation needed to produce a given bias , and taking the most generous possible bound for a roughly binary preference indicator, 0.5 , gives what this article calls, for a specific country c , its Country Selection-Divergence Bound: . This is a DERIVED quantity, not a measurement: it has not been run against real per-country population totals or the actual SharedResponsesSurvey.csv microdata, and no value of for any real country is claimed here. What can be computed honestly, using only the paper’s own reported extremes for n — 101 respondents at the low end, 448,125 at the high end [ 1 ] — is how small…
c is part of the quantity the equation computes from the expression on the right.
Read this term in its guide →is one of the signed contributions combined to compute the quantity on the left.
Read this term in its guide →The complete quantity below the fraction bar; it must be nonzero for this division.
Read this term in its guide →With a fixed numerator, increasing a nonzero denominator reduces the fraction. Read it with the definitions, units, and assumptions supplied by the article.
A symbol can carry a different meaning in another article. Each occurrence keeps its own guide and term definitions.
Equation 20 · AI Ethics
This equation states an equality: the expressions on both sides have the same value under the article’s assumptions.
Solving for the minimum defect correlation needed to produce a given bias , and taking the most generous possible bound for a roughly binary preference indicator, 0.5 , gives what this article calls, for a specific country c , its Country Selection-Divergence Bound: . This is a DERIVED quantity, not a measurement: it has not been run against real per-country population totals or the actual SharedResponsesSurvey.csv microdata, and no value of for any real country is claimed here. What can be computed honestly, using only the paper’s own reported extremes for n — 101 respondents at the low end, 448,125 at the high end [ 1 ] — is how small…