← Mathematical compendium

Published equation contexts

n=3000n = 3000

Why this formula appears here

A skeptical reader’s first move should be to ask whether that headline number could be sampling noise dressed up by a generous threshold. It is worth actually running that check rather than asserting an answer to it. Under a null model in which a classifier’s selections are entirely independent of label position — no cognitive bias, no architectural quirk, nothing but content — the expected share of selections landing in any one third of an evenly split label list is p0p_0 = 1/3 , and with n = 3000 independent trials per dataset the standard deviation of that observed share is σ\sigma = p0(1−p0)/n\sqrt{p_0(1-p_0)/n} ≈\approx 0.0086 , well under one percentage point. The paper’s own forty-percent threshold…

Read the full article-specific guide →

Read the representative guide

How to interpret it

Read it with the definitions, units, and assumptions supplied by the article.

Research cited beside this formula

Learn the mathematics behind it

Published contexts (1)

A symbol can carry a different meaning in another article. Each occurrence keeps its own guide and term definitions.

n=3000n = 3000

Equation 5 · Language Models & Evaluation

Cognitive Bias Was the Label; Attention Sink Is the Suspect

This equation states an equality: the expressions on both sides have the same value under the article’s assumptions.

A skeptical reader’s first move should be to ask whether that headline number could be sampling noise dressed up by a generous threshold. It is worth actually running that check rather than asserting an answer to it. Under a null model in which a classifier’s selections are entirely independent of label position — no cognitive bias, no architectural quirk, nothing but content — the expected share of selections landing in any one third of an evenly split label list is p0p_0 = 1/3 , and with n = 3000 independent trials per dataset the standard deviation of that observed share is σ\sigma = p0(1−p0)/n\sqrt{p_0(1-p_0)/n} ≈\approx 0.0086 , well under one percentage point. The paper’s own forty-percent threshold…

Equation guide → · Article →