The paper shows some significant evidence that human coin flips are not as fair as I would have expected (plus probably a bunch of people would agree with me). There’s always some probability that this happened by chance, but this is pretty low.

Of course, we should be able to build a really accurate coin flipping machine, but I never would have expected such a bias for human flippers.

This is why science is awesome and challenging your ideas is important.

Edit: hopefully this is not too wrong a place, but Lemmy is small, and I didn’t know where else I could share such an exciting finding.

86 points

My favorite part is this:

Funding The authors have no funding to declare, and conducted this research in their spare time.

permalink
report
reply
43 points

“Funding: my mom gave me the coins out of her car cupholder”

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points
*

I, too, was a poor grad student.

At that time I didn’t have a child to suck the life out of me. Just a dissertation.

(My hypothesis is that the child is worse, but my wife won’t let me conduct double blind, placebo controlled studies. Fortunately, we didn’t have twins…)

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

with their spare change

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

It’s just bizarre how high quality this evidence is. It’s probably because it’s so cheap to collect this data, and other science nerds are also science geeks like me.

Actual video of this many tests. Just data orgasm.

here it’s not ready yet.

permalink
report
parent
reply
49 points

tl;dr:

The standard model of coin flipping was extended by Persi Diaconis [12] who proposed that when people flip a ordinary coin, they introduce a small degree of ‘precession’ or wobble—a change in the direction of the axis of rotation throughout the coin’s trajectory. According to the Diaconis model, precession causes the coin to spend more time in the air with the initial side facing up. Consequently, the coin has a higher chance of landing on the same side as it started (i.e., ‘same-side bias’).

“Higher chance” being 50.77% to land on the same side it started from. But this varies by person; apparently some people introduce more precession than others. But even if you could figure out how to do it reliably, I wouldn’t bet the farm on it.

permalink
report
reply
44 points

The illusion of a coin flipping in the air allows those that have mastered the act to get near 100% precision.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Crazy how simple and obvious that seems after you see it, but I never would have suspected it if someone did it right in front of me.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Right??

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Omg. I must learn this.

Shit. I have zero cash in my house.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I tried for a few minutes, before my son got bored and wanted to move on 😜. If you do learn it, let us know!

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

illusion

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

I’m curious why you don’t think this is significant?

This is a pretty high house edge (or whatever you want to call it) for a game that seems the most fair as possible.

No casino games are that fair.

As is discussed elsewhere in this thread, you could probably practice and get that higher.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Where are coins flipped multiple times in order to gain such value from doing so? I can only think of 2up being played in Australia, 1 day per year and they don’t flick it with their thumb, so…

Where is the “house” gaining so much?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
*

You can bet on dice and coin flips.

“I bet you a dollar that my coin flip will come up heads?”

This research suggests that this is not only profitable, but can be improved upon.

Edit: so weird. Why would such a simple and correct statement be controversial? I would’ve thought that betting on heads or tails was not this far out of fair coin odds.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

I remember it feeling this way as a kid. That coins tend to land on the same side they start on.

permalink
report
reply
18 points
*

No! Bad treefrog.

If it “feels like” something, you’re probably fooling yourself.

Hard evidence. The easiest person to fool is yourself.

Edit: people, please don’t down vote treefrog. They are learning, and I am joking.

Be nice. This place is way toxic. I’m not sure how much more I can handle it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I read the beginning of the article. It confirmed my gut feeling. But I certainly didn’t run 300k coin flips to check lol

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Jokes on me! I doubt most of my decisions and the logic that lead up to them!

Evidenced based research ftw, though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

If you’re still young, careful about too much imposter syndrome.

It took me until some reasonably extreme events for me to acknowledge that I was smart.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

🤗

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I’m with you, i used to try influence what i wanted by catching it.

If i wanted what i had flipped from i caught it palm up and then revealed. If i wanted the opposite i caught it and then revealed it onto my other hand.

As i got older i wouldn’t let people catch the coin only let it hit the ground and bounce around.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

I remember the opposite: heads always felt like “right way up” to us, but the result was almost always tails no matter who flipped it. To the extent that it still feels like the heads/tails percentage is the only positive version of the 50-50-90 rule, and I will never choose anything else.

Probably confirmation bias. But I wonder if the people in my family are wobblier than others.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Now I wanna know if I can get better at landing on the same side on purpose…

permalink
report
reply
8 points
*

Yeah… I had that thought for a second. Then I geeked out on the math and came to the same conclusion I had before.

Just as I won’t learn to play poker or count cards, I’m not learning and practicing this.

I’ve got other things to do with my limited life.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I suspect you can, if there is a bias when no effort is applied I suspect you can train to increase it. I can think of two main factors at play - how fast the coin is rotating and how long it remains in the air. Both of which are under your control and I suspect you can train to become more reliable for though it might take a lot of effort. Or you can just learn to do this in 10 mins. Who is going to know the difference? It is cheating either way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Great minds think alike! I just referenced this video in another thread on this post, without having read your comment first!

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

Or you can just learn to do this in 10 mins

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I have actually tried and practised that when I was a kid :-)

permalink
report
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 18K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 538K

    Comments