NS Stats - Trends, Correlations, Anti-Correlations, Oh My!

[Socialismia]

How about Employment vs Recreational Drug Use?

[Valentine Z]

As an addendum, let us look at Black Market Per Capita (Y) vs Economic Freedom (X). Black Market Per Capita is a calculated stat, so it’s not directly from the API call. Instead, it’s API’s Black Market divided by Population. So while not a full-on analysis (for the time being), the purpose of this is to complement the two previous requests.

Linear-Linear graph with distribution as the Z-axis:

Linear-Log graphs, with population as the Z-axis.

Linear-Log graphs, with number of issues answered as the Z-axis. Though this time, the Z-axis is on a sym log scale for better clarity.

X max and Y max: 0
X min and Y min: 4 – My Lands Government, Domarcan, Polis Populi, and Meleria. All with -100 EF and 0 BM / capita. They also only have 10, 15, 20, and 27 issues answered respectively, as of the time of data extraction.
X max and Y min: 0
X min and Y max: 0

X max: 1566
X min: 355
Y max: 1 – Bright Angel with 2,316,138.70 Black Market Per Capita!
Y min: 28

And of course, the relationships themselves!

High Economic Freedom (> 84.17), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39): 350 nations out of 309530.
Low Economic Freedom (< -78.50), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62): 11664 nations out of 309530.
High Economic Freedom (> 84.17), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62): 30601 nations out of 309530.
Low Economic Freedom (< -78.50), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39): 19244 nations out of 309530.

High Economic Freedom (> 84.17), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39), High Population (> 13,212,000,000): 73 nations out of 309530.
High Economic Freedom (> 84.17), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39), Low Population (< 68,000,000): 0 nations out of 309530.

Low Economic Freedom (< -78.50), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), High Population (> 13,212,000,000): 1138 nations out of 309530.
Low Economic Freedom (< -78.50), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), Low Population (< 68,000,000): 2024 nations out of 309530.

High Economic Freedom (> 84.17), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), High Population (> 13,212,000,000): 132 nations out of 309530.
High Economic Freedom (> 84.17), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), Low Population (< 68,000,000): 36 nations out of 309530.

Low Economic Freedom (< -78.50), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39), High Population (> 13,212,000,000): 206 nations out of 309530.
Low Economic Freedom (< -78.50), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39), Low Population (< 68,000,000): 0 nations out of 309530.

High Economic Freedom (> 84.17), Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39), High Number Of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 220 nations out of 309530.
High Economic Freedom (> 84.17), Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39), Low Number Of Issues Answered (< 100): 4 nations out of 309530.

Low Economic Freedom (< -78.50), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), High Number Of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 1489 nations out of 309530.
Low Economic Freedom (< -78.50), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), Low Number Of Issues Answered (< 100): 7262 nations out of 309530.

High Economic Freedom (> 84.17), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), High Number Of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 17 nations out of 309530.
High Economic Freedom (> 84.17), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), Low Number Of Issues Answered (< 100): 289 nations out of 309530.

Low Economic Freedom (< -78.50), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39), High Number Of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 857 nations out of 309530.
Low Economic Freedom (< -78.50), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39), Low Number Of Issues Answered (< 100): 9 nations out of 309530.

[Valentine Z]

How about Employment vs Recreational Drug Use?

This has been added into the queue, thank you for your readership and request! ♥

[Trotterdam]

I still can't see any meaningful correlation from the graphs. However...

High Economic Freedom (> 84.17), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39): 350 nations out of 309530.
Low Economic Freedom (< -78.50), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62): 11664 nations out of 309530.
High Economic Freedom (> 84.17), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62): 30601 nations out of 309530.
Low Economic Freedom (< -78.50), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39): 19244 nations out of 309530.

Makes some sense. So if you have high economic freedom, you will almost certainly have little black market, since people can already get everything they want legally. If you have low economic freedom, then people are more likely to want to resort to the black market to get things that they can't (or that are too heavily taxed) on the open market... but they make or may not actually succeed at doing so, depending on how good your law enforcement is (or more idealistically, educational initiaives teaching people that banned stuff is bad and they really shouldn't want it). It can go either way: either you economic freedoms are so low that people are driven to do all their trading on the black market, or you economic freedoms are so low that it's impossible to run a black market without the economic oversight bureau catching you (or anything in between).

...Of course, this is just adjusted economic freedom, so it doesn't record what happens to low-freedom capitalist nations.

[Socialismia]

I still can't see any meaningful correlation from the graphs. However...

High Economic Freedom (> 84.17), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39): 350 nations out of 309530.
Low Economic Freedom (< -78.50), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62): 11664 nations out of 309530.
High Economic Freedom (> 84.17), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62): 30601 nations out of 309530.
Low Economic Freedom (< -78.50), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39): 19244 nations out of 309530.

Makes some sense. So if you have high economic freedom, you will almost certainly have little black market, since people can already get everything they want legally. If you have low economic freedom, then people are more likely to want to resort to the black market to get things that they can't (or that are too heavily taxed) on the open market... but they make or may not actually succeed at doing so, depending on how good your law enforcement is (or more idealistically, educational initiaives teaching people that banned stuff is bad and they really shouldn't want it). It can go either way: either you economic freedoms are so low that people are driven to do all their trading on the black market, or you economic freedoms are so low that it's impossible to run a black market without the economic oversight bureau catching you (or anything in between).

...Of course, this is just adjusted economic freedom, so it doesn't record what happens to low-freedom capitalist nations.

I thought the correlation was more on law enforcement and other related stuff

[Valentine Z]

The only conclusions I can sort of draw from it is the fact that some of the trends seem to be only for not-very-frequent issue answerers. In particular:

Low Economic Freedom (< -78.50), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), High Number Of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 1489 nations out of 309530.
Low Economic Freedom (< -78.50), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), Low Number Of Issues Answered (< 100): 7262 nations out of 309530.

High Economic Freedom (> 84.17), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), High Number Of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 17 nations out of 309530.
High Economic Freedom (> 84.17), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), Low Number Of Issues Answered (< 100): 289 nations out of 309530.

I forgot to note that for the 28 nations with 0 Black Market Per Capita, they are all low population / starting nations, from 5 million to 12 million pop. So, regardless of answering issues, there will be a point when BM will just start and happen, it would appear.

[Valentine Z]

Just to add on a little bit like the last one, let us look at Black Market Per Capita (Y) vs Taxation (X). Black Market Per Capita is a calculated stat, so it’s not directly from the API call. Instead, it’s API’s Black Market divided by pop. Taxation is a relatively more tedious one to do thanks to how it is scaled. The negative scale could go all the way beyond -600 while the positive is only beyond 150. Other than to question the logic and idea of taxation rates being negative (implying government handouts) or more than 100 (meaning they take everything and then some), from a purely mathematical and graphical standpoint, it is a little bit difficult. I also have something to add on regarding Symlog (Symmetrical Logarithm), which I will detail in another post. Anyway, on to the graphs!

Linear-Linear graph with distribution as the Z-axis:

Linear-Log graph with distribution as the Z-axis:

Linear-Log graph with population as the Z-axis:

Linear-Log graphs, with number of issues answered as the Z-axis. Though this time, the Z-axis is on a sym log scale for better clarity.

X max and Y max: 0
X min and Y min: 0
X max and Y min: 0
X min and Y max: 0

X max: 1 – Kindjal with 153.66
X min: 1 – Blogh with -611.07
Y max: 1 – Bright Angel with 2,316,138.70
Y min: 28

And of course, the relationships themselves!

High Taxation (> 73.12), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39): 9873 nations out of 309530.
Low Taxation (< 7.08), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62): 204 nations out of 309530.
High Taxation (> 73.12), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62): 21057 nations out of 309530.
Low Taxation (< 7.08), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39): 30705 nations out of 309530.

High Taxation (> 73.12), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39), High Population (> 13,212,000,000): 1642 nations out of 309530.
High Taxation (> 73.12), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39), Low Population (< 68,000,000): 0 nations out of 309530.

Low Taxation (< 7.08), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), High Population (> 13,212,000,000): 153 nations out of 309530.
Low Taxation (< 7.08), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), Low Population (< 68,000,000): 9 nations out of 309530.

High Taxation (> 73.12), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), High Population (> 13,212,000,000): 4087 nations out of 309530.
High Taxation (> 73.12), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), Low Population (< 68,000,000): 425 nations out of 309530.

Low Taxation (< 7.08), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39), High Population (> 13,212,000,000): 333 nations out of 309530.
Low Taxation (< 7.08), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39), Low Population (< 68,000,000): 0 nations out of 309530.

High Taxation (> 73.12), Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39), High Number Of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 7522 nations out of 309530.
High Taxation (> 73.12), Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39), Low Number Of Issues Answered (< 100): 44 nations out of 309530.

Low Taxation (< 7.08), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), High Number Of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 91 nations out of 309530.
Low Taxation (< 7.08), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), Low Number Of Issues Answered (< 100): 64 nations out of 309530.

High Taxation (> 73.12), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), High Number Of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 4748 nations out of 309530.
High Taxation (> 73.12), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62), Low Number Of Issues Answered (< 100): 2801 nations out of 309530.

Low Taxation (< 7.08), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39), High Number Of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 356 nations out of 309530.
Low Taxation (< 7.08), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39), Low Number Of Issues Answered (< 100): 12 nations out of 309530.

I did think about using Freedom from Taxation, but to make it a bit fairer to the remaining requests, I might revisit this again another time! ♥ I won't spoil it too much, but I will say that it's not as straightforward as I thought, i.e. Freedom from Taxation does not have a direct single correlation against Taxation.

[Valentine Z]

So as an intermission, perhaps I should talk about a relatively large elephant in the room. Graphs are always a… well, for the lack of a better word, funny way to plot and to figure out at times. There are times when it’s relatively more straightforward and you can see it even on Linear scales. Other times it’s kind of all over the place. And other times, you have the logarithm graphs to the rescue! My intent is to show the data as it is without skewing the axes, and that’s why I always have an all-Linear scale graph first to make sure that it is not an intentional misleading one, and only recently I have decided to add the grey gridlines to make it a little easier to follow. There’re also moments where I zoomed in (as you can see above) and it does help a fair bit. With all this said and done, Logarithm chart is a tedious one. While some of the charts are done using the normal log plot, the data has A LOT of negative values, in other words – where log graphs go to die and malfunction. Unless – of course, that is where I used symlog, also known as Symmetrical Log. I will do my best to explain this. I will also point out that here, I’ve used ChatGPT to look up and find some answers. With this stated, the analysis text are typed by my own hands, and NOT generated. It’s mostly for small snippets of code (as credited). I’ll let you know where I used it in this post.

First, a quick crash course on logarithm – The exponent or power to which a base must be raised to yield a given number. I have only used powers of 10 as far as I remembered, so I will only be talking about that when I mention log or lg. Basically, you have exponents – 10^0 = 1, 10^1 = 10, 10^2 = 100, and so on. Logarithm is the opposite of this, i.e. log (100) = 2, log (500,000) = 5.699. I will not go over how logarithms exactly work because that is for someone who can teach better than me! Basically, I use logarithmic scales for data like Black Market or Economic Output whereby the differences are many more Orders of Magnitude (OOM). The logarithm part is quite simple when the data’s values are more than 0. For 0 < x < 1, log x is negative. log 1 = 0. Then we have to go to the negative values, which then makes it tricky. Yes, we could use imaginary values and log 0 = Infinity, but it’s impractical.

That is where Symlog comes in. As ChatGPT put it: “The symlog scale in Matplotlib is a scale that allows for logarithmic scaling of data while also handling negative values and zero gracefully. It is particularly useful when dealing with data that spans a wide range of magnitudes, including both positive and negative values, and when linear scaling fails to adequately represent this range.” In other words, due to the data that we have, symlog is useful here. So far, so good. What may get confusing is the formula that symlog uses. It is not as straightforward as I thought, but I will do my best to explain it. Symlog deals with negative logarithms by finding the absolute value of it, and then simply making it negative. For example, symlog of -10 will be –(log 10), which is -1. Now there might be a slight confusion: What about log 0.1 = -1 ? Then wouldn’t the logarithms get muddied and mixed up? That is where the linear threshold comes in. It is basically a region where logarithm will NOT be applied. So if the linear threshold is 1, then there will be no logarithm from -1 to +1. This is better seen with a graph below, y = x.

Notice how the line is linear from -1 to +1, since that is where linear is being used. Anything beyond that and it will start doing either log(x) for positive values, or log(abs(x)) for negative values. So far so good, no problem here. However, things get unusual when linear threshold is between 0 and 1 (for example, 0.10). The graph below is linear threshold being equal to 0.10. It is okay from -0.10 to +0.10, but the values beyond that before it hits 1 gets tricky. By definition and mathematics, log (0.25) equates to -1.386. On the graph, however, symlog (0.25) is around 0.28. I would go on to explain a bit more on this, and as I’ve realised – symmetrical log does not have a single equation.

There is a lot more to this, including a scientific paper (as mentioned here). ChatGPT also spat out this charmer:

So… what is the consensus to this? I am running on fumes as I am typing this and I am a little hazy about the mathematics behind it. For the benefit of everyone where – if log graph is used, I will do my best to not muddle up the numbers. But basically, from this point forward, linear threshold should NOT be set below 1. Linear Threshold will be at least 1 so that the values between -1 and +1 will not become messy to interpret. It’s easier this way for everyone, I reckon. -1 < x < 1 ? Linear. Anything beyond? Log scale.

Thank you for hearing me out, and I’m sorry if this confused you more than it already is! Now, the important question - does this affect the graphs I have made? I might have to check, but if the linear threshold is set between 0 and 1, then I have messed up. It is not wrong, per se, but the math gets complex.

[Umbratellus]

High Taxation (> 73.12), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39): 9873 nations out of 309530.
Low Taxation (< 7.08), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62): 204 nations out of 309530.
High Taxation (> 73.12), Low Black Market Per Capita (< 39.62): 21057 nations out of 309530.
Low Taxation (< 7.08), High Black Market Per Capita (> 11,157.39): 30705 nations out of 309530.

Genuinely was a little surprised by these results at first. Made sense in my head that high taxes -> high black market (to avoid paying taxes), and low taxes -> lower black market (no taxes to dodge). Thinking about it though, it makes sense from the NS perspective of things. If I had to guess, the prevalence of high taxation but low black market would be a result of two things that directly mirror with the low taxation with high black market; police spending and corruption. High tax nations are likely to overall have a high amount of spending on their police forces, which can more directly create pressure that prevents the black market from growing. Conversely though, I bet one of the large factors with the low taxation nations is corruption (and also lower police spending). Corruption for whatever reason essentially acts as an administrative lubricant in NationStates, usually helping to make things run more efficiently and reduce the overall burden of taxation on the average citizen. Corruption tends to be highly correlated with the black market, so what we might be seeing there is essentially a twofold knock-on effect of corruption; lower tax burdens and a burgeoning black market.

[Valentine Z]

အခုတော့ ကျွန်တော်တို့ ကြားပြတ်ချိန်ယူပြီး တစ်ခြား စာရင်းအင်းကို လေ့လာကြတာပေါ့ - အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု (Y) နှင့် မထူးဆန်းမှု (X) ရဲ့ဆက်စပ်မှု ! ဒီဟာကတော့ အခြားစာရင်းအင်း တွေနဲ့ရှင်လိုက်ရင် တော်တော်လေးကွာပါတယ်၊ သင်တိုတချိုက သိမှာပေါ့ - ဒီနှစ်ခုသည် နှိုင်းယှဉ်လိုက်ရင် လုံးဝ linear correlation ပဲရှိတယ်။ ဟုတ်ပါတယ် - ဒီ relation တစ်ခုကပဲအဲ့လိုရှိတာပါ၊ သူရဲ့ regression equation က y = -x + ၅၅ ပါ။ ဒီ relations ကအဲ့တော့ သူ့မှာထူးခြားတဲ့ စရိုက်လေးတွေရှိပါတယ်။ ကြည့်ကြရအောင်ပေါ့ !

Linear-Linear, အရောင် Z-axis ကတော့ Gaussian Kernel သိပ်သည်းခန့်မှန်းချက် အကြိမ်ရေ။ ဒီတစ်ခါတော့ သူ့ကို ပထမဦးဆုံး linear scale နဲ့ပြသပါသည် !

---

Linear-Linear နဲ့ပဲ ဒီတစ်ခါကတော့ အရောင် Z-axis က လူဦးရေဖြစ်ပါသည်။

စနစ်မကျတဲ့ ဒေသာ ထည့်နည်း:

အနည်းဆုံး လူဦးရေ ဒေတာကို နောက်ဆုံးထည့်ချင်း :

အများဆုံး လူဦးရေ ဒေတာကို နောက်ဆုံးထည့်ချင်း :

---

ဒီတစ်ခါ အရောင် Z-axis ကတော့ ကိစ္စဖြေအရေအတွက် ပါ၊ ဒါကလည်း စိတ်ဝင်စားစရာလေးတွေ ရှိပါတယ် !

စနစ်မကျတဲ့ ဒေသာ ထည့်နည်း:

အနည်းဆုံး ကိစ္စဖြေအရေအတွက် ဒေတာကို နောက်ဆုံးထည့်ချင်း :

အများဆုံး ကိစ္စဖြေအရေအတွက် ဒေတာကို နောက်ဆုံးထည့်ချင်း :

---

X-axis histogram, Linear:

Y-axis histogram, Linear:

---

အပိုအချက်တစ်ခုအနေနဲ့ , ကိစ္စဖြေအရလုံးဝမရှိတဲ့ နိုင်ငံတွေကိုကြည့်ရအောင်:
X-axis histogram, Linear:

Y-axis histogram, Linear:

---

X အများဆုံး နှင့် Y အများဆုံး : 0
X အနည်းဆုံး နှင့် Y အနည်းဆုံး : 0
X အများဆုံး နှင့် Y အနည်းဆုံး : 3 – Random Card Farmer 143, Upper-Wisconsin, Average Nation-3.
X အနည်းဆုံး နှင့် Y အများဆုံး : 1 – Aryax.

X အများဆုံး : 3 – Random Card Farmer 143, Upper-Wisconsin, Average Nation-3.
X အနည်းဆုံး : 1 – Aryax.
Y အများဆုံး : 1 – Aryax.
Y အနည်းဆုံး : 3 – Random Card Farmer 143, Upper-Wisconsin, Average Nation-3.

မထူးဆန်းမှု များ (> ၅၁.၈၃), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု များ (> ၃၉.၆၆): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၀ ။
မထူးဆန်းမှု နည်း (< ၁၅.၃၄), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု နည်း (< ၃.၁၇): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၀ ။
မထူးဆန်းမှု များ (> ၅၁.၈၃), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု နည်း (< ၃.၁၇): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၃၀၉၄၇ ။
မထူးဆန်းမှု နည်း (< ၁၅.၃၄), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု များ (> ၃၉.၆၆): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၃၀၉၅၂ ။

အဲ့လိုရှိတာပေါ့။ ဒါဟာ ရိုးရှင်းသော relation တစ်ခုဖြစ်ပါတယ် – သင့်တိုင်းပြည်က အလွန်ပျင်းစရာကောင်းရင် အစွန်းရောက်ပြီး ထူးဆန်းသော အယူအဆ သိပ်ရှိကြမှာ မဟုတ်ပါဘူး။ သို့သော်ငြား တကယ့်ကို ထူးဆန်းတဲ့ ကမ္ဘာ – တစ်ခုခု ထူးဆန်း တဲ့ဟာအမြဲဖြစ် တောနေရာ – အဲ့တာမှာ‌တော့ မထူးဆန်းမှု ဆိုတာမရှိဘူးပေါ့။ သို့သော်၊ ဝိရောဓိဆိုတာ အမြဲရှိတယ် – သင်ဟာ သာမန်ရေလွန်လွန်း တယ်ဆိုတာကော ထူးဆန်းတစ်မျိုး မဟုတ်ဘူးလား ?

မထူးဆန်းမှု များ (> ၅၁.၈၃), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု များ (> ၃၉.၆၆), လူဦးရေ များ (> ၁၃,၂၁၂,၀၀၀,၀၀၀): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၀ ။
မထူးဆန်းမှု များ (> ၅၁.၈၃), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု များ (> ၃၉.၆၆), လူဦးရေ နည်း (< ၆၈,၀၀၀,၀၀၀): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၀ ။

မထူးဆန်းမှု နည်း (< ၁၅.၃၄), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု နည်း (< ၃.၁၇), လူဦးရေ များ (> ၁၃,၂၁၂,၀၀၀,၀၀၀): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၀ ။
မထူးဆန်းမှု နည်း (< ၁၅.၃၄), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု နည်း (< ၃.၁၇), လူဦးရေ နည်း (< ၆၈,၀၀၀,၀၀၀): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၀ ။

မထူးဆန်းမှု များ (> ၅၁.၈၃), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု နည်း (< ၃.၁၇), လူဦးရေ များ (> ၁၃,၂၁၂,၀၀၀,၀၀၀): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၁၃၉၉ ။
မထူးဆန်းမှု များ (> ၅၁.၈၃), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု နည်း (< ၃.၁၇), လူဦးရေ နည်း (< ၆၈,၀၀၀,၀၀၀): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၂၇၃၁ ။

မထူးဆန်းမှု နည်း (< ၁၅.၃၄), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု များ (> ၃၉.၆၆), လူဦးရေ များ (> ၁၃,၂၁၂,၀၀၀,၀၀၀): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၂၅၆၀ ။
မထူးဆန်းမှု နည်း (< ၁၅.၃၄), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု များ (> ၃၉.၆၆), လူဦးရေ နည်း (< ၆၈,၀၀၀,၀၀၀): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၁၇၀၅ ။

မထူးဆန်းမှု များ (> ၅၁.၈၃), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု များ (> ၃၉.၆၆), ကိစ္စဖြေအရေအတွက် များ (> ၁၀၀၀): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၀ ။
မထူးဆန်းမှု များ (> ၅၁.၈၃), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု များ (> ၃၉.၆၆), ကိစ္စဖြေအရေအတွက် နည်း (< ၁၀၀): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၀ ။

မထူးဆန်းမှု နည်း (< ၁၅.၃၄), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု နည်း (< ၃.၁၇), ကိစ္စဖြေအရေအတွက် များ (> ၁၀၀၀): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၀ ။
မထူးဆန်းမှု နည်း (< ၁၅.၃၄), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု နည်း (< ၃.၁၇), ကိစ္စဖြေအရေအတွက် နည်း (< ၁၀၀): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၀ ။

မထူးဆန်းမှု များ (> ၅၁.၈၃), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု နည်း (< ၃.၁၇), ကိစ္စဖြေအရေအတွက် များ (> ၁၀၀၀): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၄၈ ။
မထူးဆန်းမှု များ (> ၅၁.၈၃), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု နည်း (< ၃.၁၇), ကိစ္စဖြေအရေအတွက် နည်း (< ၁၀၀): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၃၀၇၀၅ ။

မထူးဆန်းမှု နည်း (< ၁၅.၃၄), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု များ (> ၃၉.၆၆), ကိစ္စဖြေအရေအတွက် များ (> ၁၀၀၀): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၃၉၈ ။
မထူးဆန်းမှု နည်း (< ၁၅.၃၄), အယူဝါဒ အစွန်းရောက်မှု များ (> ၃၉.၆၆), ကိစ္စဖြေအရေအတွက် နည်း (< ၁၀၀): နိုင်ငံ ၃၀၉၅၃၀ ထဲက ၂၉၅၃၁ ။

စိတ်ဝင်စားဖို့ ကောင်းတာက အဆက်မပြတ် ကိစ္စဖြေပေးသော နိုင်ငံတွေက သူတို့ရဲ့ အစကများသော မထူးဆန်းမှု ဖြေးဖြေးချင်းကျသွားလိမ့်မယ်။ သို့သော်ငြား သင့်နိုင်ငံသည် အစတည်းက သာမန် သို့မဟုတ် ထူးဆန်းနိုင်ပါသည်။

Before this gets reported for spam - Happy Early April Fools. The English version will come soon.
And…. Well, jokes on you all, I may have been pranked harder because this does take a while to write. Was it worth it? Oh absolutely. We got to see a new stats, and I get to brush up my Burmese.
Also bonus points if you can guess what the two stats are.

[Pencil Sharpeners 2]

Ideological radicality vs averageness is my guess as soon as I saw that first graph haha

[Valentine Z]

That is indeed correct! And with that, here's the actual English version! <3

We will take an intermission with a different statistical analysis – Ideological Radicality vs Averageness! So this is going to be a different one compared to the others, because as some of you may have already know by now, this appears to be the only one where the correlation is absolutely linear. Yes, it is a very linear relationship, even with an equation of Y = –X + 55. This also gives rise to several unique features that we will see along the way. Let’s see!

Linear-Linear, with Gaussian KDE Frequency (Density) now being ran on a linear scale for the very first time!

---

And then Linear-Linear for all, but this time with Population as the Z-axis.

Randomized Data Addition:

Smallest Population Added Last:

Largest Population Added Last:

---

This time with Number of Issues Answered, which may bring some interest too!

Randomized Data Addition:

Smallest Issue Answerers Added Last:

Largest Issue Answerers Added Last:

---

X-axis histogram, Linear:

Y-axis histogram, Linear:

---

As an extra tidbit, filtering for the nations with 0 issues answered:
X-axis histogram, Linear:

Y-axis histogram, Linear:

---

X max and Y max: 0
X min and Y min: 0
X max and Y min: 3 – Random Card Farmer 143, Upper-Wisconsin, Average Nation-3.
X min and Y max: 1 – Aryax.

X max: 3 – Random Card Farmer 143, Upper-Wisconsin, Average Nation-3.
X min: 1 – Aryax.
Y max: 1 – Aryax.
Y min: 3 – Random Card Farmer 143, Upper-Wisconsin, Average Nation-3.

High Averageness (> 51.83), High Ideological Radicality (> 39.66): 0 nations out of 309530.
Low Averageness (< 15.34), Low Ideological Radicality (< 3.17): 0 nations out of 309530.
High Averageness (> 51.83), Low Ideological Radicality (< 3.17): 30947 nations out of 309530.
Low Averageness (< 15.34), High Ideological Radicality (> 39.66): 30952 nations out of 309530.

Well, there it is! It’s quite a simple trend – if your nation is highly average, that can only mean it does not have the most radical and strange ideas and things happening. On the other hand, a really strange world with something that is out of the ordinary happening at any one point, may also not be having a large amount of averageness. Then again, there is always this paradox: Is a highly average nation be unique and strange for being so… ordinary?

High Averageness (> 51.83), High Ideological Radicality (> 39.66), High Population (> 13,212,000,000): 0 nations out of 309530.
High Averageness (> 51.83), High Ideological Radicality (> 39.66), Low Population (< 68,000,000): 0 nations out of 309530.

Low Averageness (< 15.34), Low Ideological Radicality (< 3.17), High Population (> 13,212,000,000): 0 nations out of 309530.
Low Averageness (< 15.34), Low Ideological Radicality (< 3.17), Low Population (< 68,000,000): 0 nations out of 309530.

High Averageness (> 51.83), Low Ideological Radicality (< 3.17), High Population (> 13,212,000,000): 1399 nations out of 309530.
High Averageness (> 51.83), Low Ideological Radicality (< 3.17), Low Population (< 68,000,000): 2731 nations out of 309530.

Low Averageness (< 15.34), High Ideological Radicality (> 39.66), High Population (> 13,212,000,000): 2560 nations out of 309530.
Low Averageness (< 15.34), High Ideological Radicality (> 39.66), Low Population (< 68,000,000): 1705 nations out of 309530.

High Averageness (> 51.83), High Ideological Radicality (> 39.66), High Number of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 0 nations out of 309530.
High Averageness (> 51.83), High Ideological Radicality (> 39.66), Low Number of Issues Answered (< 100): 0 nations out of 309530.

Low Averageness (< 15.34), Low Ideological Radicality (< 3.17), High Number of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 0 nations out of 309530.
Low Averageness (< 15.34), Low Ideological Radicality (< 3.17), Low Number of Issues Answered (< 100): 0 nations out of 309530.

High Averageness (> 51.83), Low Ideological Radicality (< 3.17), High Number of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 48 nations out of 309530.
High Averageness (> 51.83), Low Ideological Radicality (< 3.17), Low Number of Issues Answered (< 100): 30705 nations out of 309530.

Low Averageness (< 15.34), High Ideological Radicality (> 39.66), High Number of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 398 nations out of 309530.
Low Averageness (< 15.34), High Ideological Radicality (> 39.66), Low Number of Issues Answered (< 100): 29531 nations out of 309530.

The interesting thing here is that a nation that is constantly answering issues will find it hard to keep their averageness. On the other hand, you can either be really strange or out of ordinary fresh out of the box.

[Valentine Z]

Culture (Y) vs Civil Rights (X) - Requested by Wizlandia. I am going to say that this one is also interesting as well. Well, it is! Let’s get to it!

With density as the Z-axis. As you know, Purple = Least Dense = Very rare. Red = Most Dense = Where most nations are. Most of the very common data points are more or less linear, so there’s not a lot of changes as Civil Rights increase or decrease. However, there are relative outliers, perhaps frequent issue-answerers, will find that as civil rights increase, the culture increases as well… to a point. When it gets excessive, it will then start to drop more.

Population as the Z-axis. Once again, all of them are on a linear scale.

Number of Issues Answered as the Z-axis.

X-axis histograms. Civil Rights unfortunately has a very large wall due to the starting values of the nations that has never answered an issue.

This changes a little bit if we are filtering by “Nations that has answered at least one issue” / “Excluding nations that never answered an issue”. Again, note that this might be inaccurate for larger / older nations.

Y-axis histograms:

X max and Y max: 0
X min and Y min: 1 – Copercia
X max and Y min: 0
X min and Y max: 0

X max: 1260
X min: 305
Y max: 1 – Complexo
Y min: 1 – Copercia

Now onto the relations!

X and Y relations:
High Civil Rights (> 77.89), High Culture (> 89.00): 3851 nations out of 309530.
Low Civil Rights (< 18.30), Low Culture (< 55.00): 3968 nations out of 309530.
High Civil Rights (> 77.89), Low Culture (< 55.00): 44077 nations out of 309530.
Low Civil Rights (< 18.30), High Culture (> 89.00): 22600 nations out of 309530.

On a technical standpoint, I have double-checked the numbers. Due to the way the culture is distributed, the 90th percentile of Culture is at 80-90 range, and in the case with my data, it is at 89. It’s much lower than I expected it to be. Then on the definition of culture itself. By dictionary’s definition, culture is “the arts and other manifestations of human intellectual achievement regarded collectively,”, as well as “the ideas, customs, and social behavior of a particular people or society.” Then there’s also the word “cultured” according to the descriptor of the stats, defined as “characterized by refined taste and manners and good education.” So, quite a few definitions to work with!

Anyway, as mentioned before, as civil rights increase, the culture will also increase, but again, only to a point. The first one (also the smallest) means that as the civil rights is at its zenith, everyone is able to practice their cultures as they see fit, and the government says nothing about it. However, there is also a problem – IF the civil rights is way too excessive, that means that there is nothing much (or anything at all) in the way that would stop someone from, well, stop or insult someone else’s culture. The curse of “too much rights”, so to speak. Yes, you CAN practice and show off your culture, but there are going to be people who will not see the same way as you and eventually, that specific cultural part may get lost because of the social dogma as a whole. Perhaps this is some backfire effect that, admittedly, I am unable to formulate into words properly: Everyone stopped trying out something unique or more sophisticated in fear of getting insulted or others putting them down constantly. Or by second definition, there is not a lot of taste and manners because everyone realized that they could speak and do anything they want. As I have talked about the culture taking a dive as the civil rights go high, this effectively summarized both High Civil Rights + High Culture and High Civil Rights + Low Culture together, and as a result – two trends, one paragraph.

Then there is also the strangely low group of nations – low civil rights and low culture. This can possibly be described by these nations not being able to express themselves due to the government looking at everything they do, and with harsh consequences if they stepped out of line. In other words, a dictatorship with its own set of strange rules. Appropriately enough and perhaps by some ill-manned timing, the obvious real-life example would be one of Chechnya banning songs that are too low or too high in terms of BPM. With music obviously affected, do think about how much it limits freedom of culture. No more relaxing or upbeat music, along many other things for them.

The last one – Low Civil Rights and High Culture – sounds a bit contradictory at first. With the government not allowing a lot of things, culture and traditions are going to be stifled. Again, note that civil rights does not necessarily only mean “Whether or not people are able to play songs, dance, read books.” Perhaps the government DOES allow these things, they just limit you on what you are able to do with them. For instance, they are a dictator that has draconian laws at every corner of the country, BUT they also are a fan of theatre, musicals, literature, the works. In other words, you are more than allowed to listen to a library of government-approved songs, but said library of songs are big enough that you might not complain. By extension, you are definitely also allowed to listen to them, BUT just that you are not allowed to blast them in the neighborhood (and thus, the decrease of rights to party).

And now to compare these with population. Population does not seem to make as much sense here, at least when comparing with these two stats. The four trends, by common sense, should not be affected by population.

High Civil Rights (> 85.82), High Culture (> 80.00), High Population (> 13,212,000,000): 419 nations out of 309530.
High Civil Rights (> 85.82), High Culture (> 80.00), Low Population (< 68,000,000): 0 nations out of 309530.

Low Civil Rights (< 19.58), Low Culture (< 59.00), High Population (> 13,212,000,000): 605 nations out of 309530.
Low Civil Rights (< 19.58), Low Culture (< 59.00), Low Population (< 68,000,000): 65 nations out of 309530.

High Civil Rights (> 85.82), Low Culture (< 59.00), High Population (> 13,212,000,000): 18 nations out of 309530.
High Civil Rights (> 85.82), Low Culture (< 59.00), Low Population (< 68,000,000): 1 nations out of 309530.

Low Civil Rights (< 19.58), High Culture (> 80.00), High Population (> 13,212,000,000): 163 nations out of 309530.
Low Civil Rights (< 19.58), High Culture (> 80.00), Low Population (< 68,000,000): 0 nations out of 309530.

Comparison with Number of Issues Answered. The four trends are basically earnable if you answer issues constantly, so there’s no limitation.

High Civil Rights (> 85.82), Culture (> 80.00), High Number of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 678 nations out of 309530.
High Civil Rights (> 85.82), Culture (> 80.00), Low Number of Issues Answered (< 100): 36 nations out of 309530.

Low Civil Rights (< 19.58), Low Culture (< 59.00), High Number of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 1607 nations out of 309530.
Low Civil Rights (< 19.58), Low Culture (< 59.00), Low Number of Issues Answered (< 100): 670 nations out of 309530.

High Civil Rights (> 85.82), Low Culture (< 59.00), High Number of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 22 nations out of 309530.
High Civil Rights (> 85.82), Low Culture (< 59.00), Low Number of Issues Answered (< 100): 24 nations out of 309530.
This is doable for both high and low number of issue-answerers. Although, as you answer more issues, this will get more difficult for you to earn.

Low Civil Rights (< 19.58), High Culture (> 80.00), High Number of Issues Answered (> 1,000): 851 nations out of 309530.
Low Civil Rights (< 19.58), High Culture (> 80.00), Low Number of Issues Answered (< 100): 6 nations out of 309530.
Not as possible for nations that rarely addresses their issues.

[Trotterdam]

X and Y relations:
High Civil Rights (> 77.89), High Culture (> 89.00): 3851 nations out of 309530.
Low Civil Rights (< 18.30), Low Culture (< 55.00): 3968 nations out of 309530.
High Civil Rights (> 77.89), Low Culture (< 55.00): 44077 nations out of 309530.
Low Civil Rights (< 18.30), High Culture (> 89.00): 22600 nations out of 309530.

Huh, that's weird. From the graphs, it appears that Civil Rights and Culture have a slight but clear positive correlation (although also that there's a strong band favoring 60-70 Culture regardless of Civil Rights). But by these numbers, it's the other way around?

Another possible reason for a negative correlation between Civil Rights and Culture might be that low-rights nations have a strong sense of tradition, while nations with high rights allow you to just do whatever you want rather than following cultural rituals. Not everyone is a master artist, and many people would act rather boring if left to their own devices.

[Valentine Z]

X and Y relations:
High Civil Rights (> 77.89), High Culture (> 89.00): 3851 nations out of 309530.
Low Civil Rights (< 18.30), Low Culture (< 55.00): 3968 nations out of 309530.
High Civil Rights (> 77.89), Low Culture (< 55.00): 44077 nations out of 309530.
Low Civil Rights (< 18.30), High Culture (> 89.00): 22600 nations out of 309530.

Huh, that's weird. From the graphs, it appears that Civil Rights and Culture have a slight but clear positive correlation (although also that there's a strong band favoring 60-70 Culture regardless of Civil Rights). But by these numbers, it's the other way around?

Another possible reason for a negative correlation between Civil Rights and Culture might be that low-rights nations have a strong sense of tradition, while nations with high rights allow you to just do whatever you want rather than following cultural rituals. Not everyone is a master artist, and many people would act rather boring if left to their own devices.

My guess is that it's due to the common data points. As I have seen and mentioned, Culture as a whole seems to go up as Civil Rights goes up, to a point, but then would eventually drop down.

I do agree wholeheartedly that yup, I did a triple check on these numbers to make sure I am not messing them up. The 90th Percentile / Top 10% of Culture is really low, like lower than I thought.

EDIT: Regarding your take on the negative correlation, that I also agree on. ^^

[Umbratellus]

I'm willing to bet at least half of the

High Civil Rights (> 77.89), Low Culture (< 55.00): 44077 nations out of 309530.

nations belong to the Womble wall; they all start out 97 in civil rights, and never really answering issues, they'll invariably have low culture. That's probably why when you filter by high number of issues answered, you're only left with 22 nations lol.

[Valentine Z]

I'm willing to bet at least half of the

High Civil Rights (> 77.89), Low Culture (< 55.00): 44077 nations out of 309530.

nations belong to the Womble wall; they all start out 97 in civil rights, and never really answering issues, they'll invariably have low culture. That's probably why when you filter by high number of issues answered, you're only left with 22 nations lol.

Ahhh, yeah that's a very big wall! See how they form a big wall.

[Umbratellus]

Ahhh, yeah that's a very big wall! See how they form a big wall.

(Image)

Lol yep, just shy of 20k there.