Impugning alleged randomness

Yuri Gurevich

Microsoft Research, Redmond, WA

Monday, 28 April 2014, 14:00 (note the unusual weekday)
Cybernetica Bldg (Akadeemia tee 21), room B101

Slides from the talk [pdf]

Abstract: According to a 1985 issue of New York Times, "The New Jersey Supreme Court today caught up with the Essex County Clerk and a Democrat who has conducted drawings for decades that have given Democrats the top ballot line in the county 40 times out of 41 times." But the clerk wasn't punished, and the case isn't unique. In the 1980s the Israeli tax authorities encouraged the public to request invoices (from plumbers, painters, etc.) and send the invoices in; big prices were ruffled off. But the operation collapsed when it turned out that the winner was none other than the Director of Customs and VAT at the time.

You may be convinced that such lotteries are rigged, but how would you justify your assertion in the court of law? The probability of the suspicious outcome is negligible but the probability of any particular outcome is negligible. What can you say? We attempt to furnish you with an argument.

(Joint work with Grant Olney Passmore.)

Tarmo Uustalu
Last update 16.4.2014