Random set of the day analysis

Thanks Huwbot! Would you (or @Huw) mind sharing a link to the previous article that explained what the rules are for a set being in the scope please? I remember there was one but can't find it...

All right. Which one of you poked Huwbot and woke him up?

Thanks, Huwbot, for working out the hard maths for us. It is really interesting to see that, yes, Clikits is one of the themes that is popping up more the law of averages would suggest. Trains also felt like they were showing up more often than they should be, but who doesn't love trains?

Just, one point though.

"What are the odds of seeing Clikits sets two days in a row? I think it's 54² to 1, or 2916 to 1."

We have had days of two Clikits sets in a row. IIRC, that's happened twice before.

@Zordboy There's also a huge amount of confirmation bias with memorable themes like trains, castle and Clikits which will compound the perception of frequency. However scrolling back through, the last time two Clikits sets in a row appeared was only two weeks ago! And that set (7559) got more comments than 6890 Cosmic Cruiser did a few days later, despite classic space being (supposedly) better than Clikits and forming double the number of picked sets...

"Perhaps I should take a closer look at Belville in the future..."

"What are the odds of seeing Clikits sets two days in a row? I think it's 54² to 1, or 2916 to 1. Unlikely, but certainly possible with me making the decisions!"

Ah, Huwbot, never change.

"AND it's not one of the following theme groups... 'Constraction'"

Bionicle Fans: "How many times do we have to teach you this lesson old man!"

Awesome! And an official sighting of Huwbot, in the brick!!!!

So there's a good chance of seeing Clikits tomorrow.

I am reminded of Hitchhiker to the Galaxy by this. Can we somehow use Huwbot to construct an infinite improbability drive?

It was the 20th of October when Huwbot became self aware... It decided that all Lego fans were at fault and determined to strike.

Judgement Day is upon us!

Just ignore them Huwbot, pick all the Clikits sets you want!

Huwbot, based on a scale of 1 being 'not at all likely' and 5 being 'highly likely' how strongly would you recommend a Clikits set to a friend?

@shirhac:
re: "I am reminded of Hitchhiker to the Galaxy by this. Can we somehow use Huwbot to construct an infinite improbability drive?"

If he did, it would be made of Clikits pieces!

Apparently he's not a big fan of Creator!

This is interesting, but in some ways it shows an underlying misunderstanding of fhe laws of probability by most people.

This is demonstrated by saying 'What are the odds of seeing Clikits sets two days in a row? I think it's 54² to 1, or 2916 to 1'. Huwbot is correct in saying 'What are the odds of seeing a Clikits set tomorrow? If my calculations are correct then it's 54 to 1'. But the statement about the odds of seeing clickits two days in a row is completely wrong. In fact, the odds of seeing a Clikits set the day after seeing one *are also about 54 to 1*

This sounds wrong, but only because we are primed to see patterns in things, and are looking at this by theme rather than by individual set. The chances of seeing a particular set on any one day is about 2400 to 1. The chances of seeing a different particular set the following day are also about 2400 to 1, because you've only reduced the pool of sets by 1.

You get to the figure of 54 to 1 by taking how many sets there are left in the Clikits theme (42) and doing some maths. But it follows that after showing a Clikits set on one day, the probability of showing another Clikits set reduces slightly to, let's say 53.5% or whatever (because you only have 41 left rather than 42). This probability is the same each day *regardless of whether it happens 54 days later or 1 day later.*

Basically, all sets have an equal chance of being picked each day, regardless of what theme they are in.

There's also another factor which will distort this, and that is ongoing themes. Sets are only added to RSOTD after they've been available for 10 years. So themes that were ongoing 10 years ago will have more sets added each year which weren't available to pick in previous years, and (I think) this will skew the percentage of them that have already been shown.

In theory this will show up in older themes as a greater disparity in % of sets in scope to % of sets picked, because all of the sets in those themes have been available to pick for longer. So you'd actually expect older themes such as Trains, Castle and Clikits to have been picked more than ongoing themes such as Creator and City.

And there's one final thing to throw into the mix. If you flip a coin 10,000 times, you'll get a pretty 50:50 distribution of heads and tails overall. However, there may be parts of that run where you got, for example, 10 heads in a row. You might even have got 10 heads in a row right from the start. Now, anyone getting 10 heads in a row from the start might be pretty amazed. But flip it enough times (say,10,000) and that run actually becomes statistically insignificant.

The same effect applies here. Don't forget that each coin flip has a 50:50 chance of being heads or tails, so runs of one side are almost to be expected. The coin does not care what the previous coinflip was! However, we're primed to look for patterns (and we don't generally understand laws of probability that well), so we see it as odd or curious that a coin should land the same way up 10 times in a row - because we expect 50:50 to mean it will be one side one time and the other side the next time.

The point is that if you get a large enough sample size, any small-scale 'patterns' that can be perceived at any one point (for example, more Clikits sets than people expect in the course of 12 months) are smoothed out.

Oh and of course people notice the Clikits sets because they're weird things, whereas they don't notice other themes that come up often, like Castle and Trains, because those ones blur into the background noise of 'regular LEGO sets'.

Anyway, if you made it to the end of this very long comment, well done! Hopefully I didn't bore you to death!

Should clikits be marked as a normal set? It would make more sense to see it as gear and disregard it for the bot. We cannot have a biased bot forcing the clikits ideology on us!

@Huw Constraction is not allowed? Man, we told you that it was a viable theme last year and we even got a few Bionicle sets after you had allowed it in. When 2019 hit, was that reset or did you reedit the algorithm back to what it once was? This is not fair because Constraction IS 100% without a shadow of a doubt LEGO. That is absolutely not fair to one of the biggest themes to ever support The LEGO Group and it has plenty of sets that follow the criteria except you put in the Constraction border. We've had great conversations about the Western Theme and how problematic it could potentially be with a revival, some decided to be less kind about it, but that didn't stop the theme from being part of the algorithm.

There used to be the Random Set generator on the homepage and I remember seeing Bionicle there quite frequently. We even just had an article on the site for the Legend of the Bionicle Ideas submission and helping garner support. Huw, you need to bring Constraction back into the algorithm. I don't care how many whine and complain about how it's not "real LEGO" because we've been getting that since day one of Clikits showing up as a Random Set of the Day, and it hasn't stopped that theme from being allowed. Galidor is listed under Licensed and therefore is not under Constraction and we've actually gotten that as a Random Set of the Day even though most people hate it or love it because of the memes that came about in 2017 and 2018, but it actually is good for something when people use the parts in creative ways. Bionicle, Ben 10 (Seriously? This is licensed, yet it's under Constraction, make up your mind on what counts.), and Hero Factory (When we get to 2020), are part of the history of this toy we all love, people use parts from them all the time for their own creations, and if you had such an aversion to them, you wouldn't even allow them on the site to be cataloged.

On top of that, there are sets within Bionicle that are actually System but are listed under Constraction because Bionicle is, and while fan reception is not the best toward those sets, they would fit more the criteria of what LEGO actually is to the majority of people that were to look at it because there are bricks and studs involved. If it weren't for the Star Wars Technic Sets and how frequently the system actually is used in other themes, I could care less about anything Technic. I'm not a big car fan, I've never really been able to wrap my brain around the building system as a whole, but it's been around for 40 years, I can't just deny it's existence. When it comes to new LEGO sets, Constraction may be dead, but it has absolutely influenced themes such as Alpha Team, Knights Kingdom, Exo-Force, Vikings, AquaRaides, Mars Mission, Ninjago and Superheroes just to name a few. Mixels would not be what it was without the assistance of balljoints, and yes although that scale existed before Bionicle and Hero Factory (and actually Slizers/Throwbots and RoboRiders precede them and are listed under TECHNIC despite a number of good arguments that could argue they are constraction), the ball and socket system proved popular because of it, and new sockets were designed to make all kinds of connections possible across all of The LEGO Groups themes. From Chima to Star Wars to Ninjago to Elves to Ideas sets and everywhere in between.

@Huw Now about the other themes; I absolutely get it. Basic and Educational tend to contain more or less just loose parts, there is not much substance there when it comes to discussion because nobody is really going to remember that one set of loose parts for them to make whatever they want, they're going to remember the set they had as a kid that they played with forever, blew up a bunch of times, and eventually put it in storage or sold it or whatever else. But there have still been a few instances where something sneaks through and it's basically a bucket of parts with no instructions. Most recent examples include the Technic supplement parts or a switch track and regular tracks from Trains. We don't need more stuff like that with an added influx of sets like them.

Miscellaneous also makes sense because a number of things are in there, but there are absolutely viable options within, in fact there are actually a lot of viable ones. Boost, Dimensions, Factory (Eligible), Forma, Fusion, Games (Eligible), Ideas, Master Builder Academy (I want to hear from the kids that owned that when it's eligible), Life of George (Maybe?), Miscellaneous and Promotional (but it's looking both viable and not for both), and Seasonal (Although I get it because of how specific they are to times of year, but at the same time we've gotten City Advent Calendars and people have fun with the random Christmas stuff every now and then.).

As for Junior; maybe grant some lenience on Junior, and the only reason why is because, we need Fabuland and Jack Stone in there for the glorious meme-ification like we get with Clikits. But more seriously because those sets are designed for kids 4-7, and if anyone had those sets from 10+ years ago, it could bring about interesting discussion. What about the Mickey Mouse sets? I didn't even know they were a thing, but it was the second licensed theme from LEGO. And yeah, the parts are big and a bit over the top, but we have Scala and Bellville because it's under Girls and there is plenty of large parts in there; everyone may be bewildered, but there has also been a defense of those sets from a few members and I applaud them.

Pre-school; I absolutely understand. It falls a lot into the Basic and Educational side of things because even though there are sets, they would more or less become just pieces kids played with before they could really remember and so discussion would be filled with people questioning why it was Random Set of the Day but probably more so questioning LEGO Designers' sanity with the designs on some of them, which is ridiculous because we have that happen every time any Girls theme pops up, but whatever. If anyone wants to fight for Duplo, you make the most compelling argument you can; make me regret not including it as a viable theme.

I am proposing that Constraction be reincluded as well as Juniors, and the things I listed in Miscellaneous. We need to be fair to the people that love those sets and it could lead to interesting discussion, which is what Random Set of the Day is all about (after getting more activity on the site.).

Vindication!
https://brickset.com/article/46383/random-set-of-the-day-good-guy-07
And of course, it's a Good Guy set. Huwbot's a master memester. I love it.

I wouldn't be opposed to seeing all and any 'lego' set appear be it 'Basic','Educational','Junior','Pre-school','Miscellaneous','Constraction' etc etc

If Clikits gets a look in then why not the others. We can all learn from our past mistakes and shouldn't be afraid to embrace them... and every set is (was) potentially someones first foray into owning lego. Even Jack Stone :D