reddingtonblack:



Which election as ever being remarked as Free and fair election in Nigeria

Despite the credibility of America electoral process did Donald trump accept

no election can ever be credible & fair where there are bad losers, lets not fool ourselves

I'm not interested in US elections or past elections
I asked a single question which doesn't deserve an epistle. Was the election free and fair? It's simple yes or no.

What you did is called Abrakata abra, out of 176,000 sheets you sampled 314PU and reached a coclusion.
Your analysis is so wrong, for your sampling to hold water you have to sample at random 6 states from 6 geopolitical zones.thank you .

muykem:
Have you not seen that Peter Obi and Atiku are gradually moving away from allegation of rigging to other areas.

They have moved to attacking Tinubu personally. That's the only way the courts will listen to them.

Beremx:
Peter Obi isn't challenging the results. He is challenging the process that made Tinubu president elect.

That's a smart move.

He's a crook then. He knew the people voted Tinubu.
Why was he saying, " we won this election and we will prove it in court" if the knows he didn't win.

Does he want to steal another person's mandate?

Mumu girl hope you read about the case similar to Obi being thrown out ?

Beremx:
Peter Obi isn't challenging the results. He is challenging the process that made Tinubu president elect.

That's a smart move.

AskProf:


A. Recorded after voting at PU.

B. Uploaded to IREV.

Both LP and APC votes were reduced here but it's Dino Melaye and PDP people shouting the most about Tinubu rigging na. Same PDP also submitted electoral petition and this is same Obio Akpor they want us to believe Wike rigged for Tinubu o. So you see we are not ready to tell ourselves the truth in this country.

I still dey laugh una...I still dey laugh una......

How do u expect a sane man to believe an IREV result dat was uploaded in office? INEC LAW stipulated dat results should be uploaded from polling units for it to be fair and credible and not at ur leisure time in d office after being doctor and people's will trampled upon.

PETER OBI IS CHALLENGING THE PROCESS.

Domipraiz:
Op ur sample shows were u belong
Don't you no ur sample will favour one candidate than the others? Because number of accredited people in polling units differs so one party might have large number in one polling unit u picked than the others.
The total vote across the nation can only do justice to this not picking samples.
I will advice u chill and wait for the outcome of the court.


I strongly believe the STOLEN mandate will surely be returned.

Don't worry the mandate will be returned to Obi in ur dream 😂😂😂. Delusion

See what we’ve turned our dear country’s image into because of personal interest. Obi may be the worst President if given an opportunity to serve Nigeria. If he has what it takes to change Nigeria to a better country and has the interest of Nigeria at heart, why all the fights and inciting statements everywhere on media, he should seek for peace and opportunity to prove himself with his wisdom. Leadership is not a personal or party thing, if he’s not taking it personal then work with chosen one. No leader comes by default, God must approve. Nigeria can still get better and better if the likes of Obi and President elect come together instead of this public display of immaturity by those who have failed. They can only be one winner and the winner is still a Nigerian so why not work together instead of protest here and there what if it gets out of control and Nigeria becomes unstable. Is that the better Nigeria he is yearning for or to further tarnish our image and destroy the system further. It won’t be easy to pick up our pieces and start all over again ooo. Let’s look at the situation in the country already and ask ourselves do we really need more trouble from this politicians or we should be concerned about moving our economy forward. Politicians in Nigeria will always remain Nigerian politicians Obi and Datti are not an exception. Nothing will change. Let fight to change Nigeria not change who becomes the president.

OP, you are not smart at all! Were you expecting INEC to upload, on its Irev, results that will contradict the ones it announced?

Again, you're not smart at all!

Throwback:
Obi should move on with his failure.

He is a mandate thief with his useless running mate that did not bring in any tangible Northern Muslim votes for which he was selected.

Even if Peter Obi's wife is appointed the INEC Chair, he will still come 3rd, and his late candidacy with Labour Party would still disqualify him.

Shame on the loser.

Even when the OP says the Rivers State results was very "strange"?

favor914:
Deceiving Himself as usual, the same way he deceived himself with his pre election victory.

TInubu has gone to Paris & London to cool off, the clown is dancing around courtrooms in Abuja?

He should be ashamed of himself for even deceiving himself on believing becoming President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Yes cooling off with someone disgracing himself on a wheelchair to avoid public scrutiny.
BAT is as restless as to ocean waves. There is nothing like cooling off.

Obinoscopy:
As a statistician, I've always believed in the powers of deductive inference based on sampling.

INEC has uploaded over 94% of the Presidential Results on the IREV Portal. Now there are people who believe that the result announced by INEC is significantly different from the result uploaded on IREV. I decided to randomly select result sheets from IREV and collate. The sample size was 314 result sheets. That sample size was gotten from an online sample size calculator. Click on this link to see my research protocol: https://www.nairaland.com/7614305/statistical-analysis-inec-result-irev

The result is very interesting.

RESULT
So after collating the result sheets from randomly selected 314 polling units, APC got a total of 15394 votes. LP got 10430 votes. NNPP got 2613 votes. And PDP got 11533 votes. So APC got the majority of votes followed by the PDP, then LP and finally NNPP.

This means INEC declaration is in tune with what's uploaded on IREV. However I noticed that the result for Rivers State is very strange. My collated result shows LP has more than 4 times the votes gotten by either APC or PDP.

So in conclusion, the IREV result is almost exactly what INEC declared. The only discrepancy is that of Rivers State. I might have to inspect that of Rivers State even further in my next analysis. But despite the Rivers State discrepancy, APC won fair and square based on the results on IREV Portal. I say this with 95% confidence.

Whether the results from IREV is authelntic or not is a matter for another discuss. My focus was just to use the results I saw on the IREV Portal.

You are using the already doctored results for your analysis. APC and INEC refused to upload results from the polling units to the IREV until they manually adjust the results in favour of APC. The manipulations happened at the collation centers.
According to INEC guidelines, results are supposed to be uploaded from the polling units, not from the collation centers.
LP won the election. APC came a distant third.

The reason it was not made seamless was for the APC and INEC to manipulate the figures in favour of Tinubu. Tinubu actually came a distant third. It would be proven in Court.
There was nothing wrong with the BVAS. At my polling unit in Lagos, for the Governorship election, we had to force the INEC staff to upload the results. Initially they wanted to take it to their collation center where they would alter the figures on the pretext of no network. When they realized that people were ready to beat them up, they quickly uploaded the results and were allowed to go.

Obinoscopy:
As a statistician, I've always believed in the powers of deductive inference based on sampling.

INEC has uploaded over 94% of the Presidential Results on the IREV Portal. Now there are people who believe that the result announced by INEC is significantly different from the result uploaded on IREV. I decided to randomly select result sheets from IREV and collate. The sample size was 314 result sheets. That sample size was gotten from an online sample size calculator. Click on this link to see my research protocol: https://www.nairaland.com/7614305/statistical-analysis-inec-result-irev

The result is very interesting.

RESULT
So after collating the result sheets from randomly selected 314 polling units, APC got a total of 15394 votes. LP got 10430 votes. NNPP got 2613 votes. And PDP got 11533 votes. So APC got the majority of votes followed by the PDP, then LP and finally NNPP.

This means INEC declaration is in tune with what's uploaded on IREV. However I noticed that the result for Rivers State is very strange. My collated result shows LP has more than 4 times the votes gotten by either APC or PDP.

So in conclusion, the IREV result is almost exactly what INEC declared. The only discrepancy is that of Rivers State. I might have to inspect that of Rivers State even further in my next analysis. But despite the Rivers State discrepancy, APC won fair and square based on the results on IREV Portal. I say this with 95% confidence.

Whether the results from IREV is authentic or not is a matter for another discuss. My focus was just to use the results I saw on the IREV Portal.

See dem! Oleku...

APC could not have won Rivers,crossriver,imo,Benue iknow for sure.

Sorry guys, I've been away for a while. I will respond to those who critiqued my analysis soon.

Pythagoras001:
did you include the probability that what you have randomly selected may have been doctored in your analysis ?? I have evidence of result uploaded offline been changed after upload. how many times did you repeat the trial with different random sample?? what was the mean, SD? I would suggest pick 100 random polling center run the analysis. pick another 100 random polling center run the analysis 1000 thousand times

GreyLaw:


You are a statistician and not a programmer. Your methodology is wrong from the outset. Your sample based on falsehood.

Let the courts help reveal the real sample then you can apply your statistics. Stop applying statistics on a corrupted sample.

stillme231:
you are getting it wrong.. did they transmit the result automatically? No be wetin Dem read for hall Dem go collate before? U waste ur time dey do yeye statistics lol

InvertedHammer:

/
So far as the results were not uploaded real time as stipulated, the data you used in your analysis is tainted and cooked. What does it take to upload pictures? Rumour has it that INEC refused to give passwords to her staff to do so. That's high level collusion. Thus no human being with an iota of integrity should reference the data uploaded ( or still being uploaded) by INEC.

Even in something as simple as a class research, professors query the integrity of data used in analysis.
/

Onyipk:

As a statistician, who I believe have some knowledge of mathematics and economics , the first thing you should beware of using is altered data filled with corrective fluidl.
Now in accounting another thing you should watch out for is transposing errors.

BIVAS MUST BALANCE.

Thus you must watch out if As figure was moved to C and vice- versa. For February 25, 2023 was a day the greatest OPEN EYE THEFT HAPPENED IN NIGERIA.

Amumaigwe:


That's why INEC declared him the winner. What new information have you put forward? The dispute is that the results uploaded on IREV were falsified. Obi is already in court, you people should meet him there. You people should stop running helter skelter.

AskProf:


A. Recorded after voting at PU.

B. Uploaded to IREV.

chuckdelis:


You failed the ultimate and most important step before data analysis which is data reliability.
There is no point analyzing an incorrect data.

millionaireman:


The result you deduced from what you got from INEC’S IREV portal is the same result the PDP and LP are challenging. So what use is your deducted result, Obinoscopy?

DeTruthh:


Keep deceiving yourself. The results uploaded by INEC, are they the true copy of the results collated and signed by the party agents at the polling units?

Or they are results single handedly written and signed by an INEC official?

Modified. For your last paragraph, we will prove in court. This is because according to the law, it says that the signed copy by all party agents shall be snapped and sent to the IREV.

So those results with same handwriting and signature for different agents just dey make me laugh.

samuelson06:


Your analysis is poor. You can't analyze a bad data. Data on IREV is largely manipulated to favor Tinubu.

justli:


If you paid close attention to the results, you'd have realised the percentage of results mutilated by canceling and adulterating the entered figured is staggering.

luluosas:
Have you laid your hands on the hard copy results sheet that INEC based their SELECTION ON? Just a friendly question please. I come in PEACE. Thank you.

Leon90:
From your analysis, it is quite clear that you do not understand the fraud that happened. The results on IREV portal are those already manipulated before uploading. You should have also checked the scanned result sheets from the polling units you sample and see the magic APC performed.

Deepthoughts:
The results loaded onto the IREV by INEC are dubious n unreliable,they are the written data from the altered n manipulated result sheets from the last presidential election,if you get to see the physical paper copies of some of those results from where the data uploaded onto the IREV was taken you would she'd tears due to how defaced by alteration n cancellations,no sane person in a sane clime would have accepted such as a valid document, I'm sure LP/obi's legal teams made photocopies of them as part of their INEC documents inspectors, Nigerians are going to be shocked,your so call statistical inference is made based on dubious data n therefore baseless, valueless n misleading, going forward parties should always insist on INEC pasting the polling units results of elections at the polling units immediately after the polls before forwarding the results to the collation centres to guard against alterations, falsification n manipulations.

poseidon12:


You are using the already doctored results for your analysis. APC and INEC refused to upload results from the polling units to the IREV until they manually adjust the results in favour of APC. The manipulations happened at the collation centers.
According to INEC guidelines, results are supposed to be uploaded from the polling units, not from the collation centers.
LP won the election. APC came a distant third.

Guys, I know there is justifiable reason to question the result sheets currently on IREV because they were not uploaded in real time. I am not saying the results on IREV are accurate. I am just trying to verify the claim by some people that if you collate all the results on IREV, LP still won. That claim is false. I'm 95% confident that the claim is false. If all the results on IREV are collated, APC won fair and square. LP and PDP are in Court to contest the result. I'm sure they will contest the result sheets on IREV, hopefully they will be able to make their case and prove that the result sheets on IREV are manipulated hence false.

Badgers14:


Sample of 314 polling units out of how many total polling units in Nigeria??

Trying to understand your sampling

Ekpekus:

Random sampling Again, the sample size won't give a true reflection of results.
What was the p-value?

CodeTemplar:
My regard for this moniker just dropped like a thousandth fold.
You expect me to accept your randomness of sample like that. I cannot. The randomness is everything in an exercise like this.

akinade28:

How did you do your sampling? How can we trust your sampling process?

imbless:

Which sample technique did you use? As a statistician u are, why did you use 314 result sheet to judge a population of more than 150k size?
This your analysis is next to bullcrap.

OfficialAPCNig:

My brother that's not how to run statistical analysis for a heterogeneous data population.

First, you have to segment the population into it's homogenous units and then randomly select 314 data points to form your data samples.

In the case of this election, Nigeria is a federation with 36 federating unit and an FCT.

So, make generalization that is valid and representative, you have to randomly select 314 PUs from each state and the FCT. So you need at least a sample size of at least 11,618 to make a valid submission.

But if you are sampling a state, then you need to draw your samples from it's constituent units, that's is the LGA.

So, basing your analysis on a sample size of 314 PUs drawn nationwide will give you a miss leading results.

So, always break a hetergenous population to it's homogenous units before drawing your samples.

Regards

sonnie10:


Out of over 170k polling units you claimed to have used sample size from 314 PUs to come to a reasonable conclusion?.

Secondly, the reliability of the data both from Irev and the online source is questionable. You can’t build truth from falsehood. It is called veracity of information source in data analysis.
So, out of the psychometric properties in data authentication, reliability, veracity and sensitivity , you got none right.

Thirdly, what process did you use in the randomization. Did you consider the skewed manner different voters are distributed in Nigeria . In other words, no standard deviation was considered in your analysis.

What was your inclusion and exclusion criteria when collecting the samples? Not all data should be used for analysis, even if they were randomly collected.

Fifth, you failed to declare your interest in the process. Bias error could affect the method and analysis. Are you APC, LP or PDP? Who is bank rolling you? LP does not give shi shi!

In conclusion, your analysis failed to achieve its intended goal.

thatigboman:
Obinoscopy, no be only u study statistics o. Drop the full evidence of your research. Drop the samples u used, drop the research methodology u used, drop your tools of research analysis and your formulae and lculations used in the research and the results. That enabled you come to this conclusion.
And mind u, if u are a scientist, you know that scientists are not allowed to dabble into politics, just carry out your research and state the result of what u carried out.
And not just say u took the samples from all the whole states, how did u take them? Did u go to Irev for example and choose all the third local govts in each particular state and download all the polling unit results in all of them? And if there are polling units reports missing, did u state that in your comment?

AdoOloro:

You could still be wrong sir. Mere 314 polling stations is inadequate to draw conclusions. What if you chose results from places where the APC had the highest votes and the LP the lowest. Example, the middle belt. Your entire 314, though you selected them randomly, could come from that region. Now imagine that you picked like 70% of that 314 from Lagos and plateau states unknowingly, your conclusions wouldn't be same as you claim now.( Lagos and plateau states being states where the LP which came third in the announcement had crazily high votes)
Even if you decided to pick evenly randomly from each state, your result wouldn't be adequate to draw your kind of conclusion. As you could still have made a one-sided selection.
In a nutshell, my point is, you need all the results of all the polling stations to be able to draw a conclusion.

tplayer:



Hello, well done. I love that you love statistics. Our disregard for it is one reason this nation is not progressing fast. But I have one few question:

How exactly did you arrive at such a very small sample size? I think the statistical power is too low to make your result reliable. You are exposing yourself to too much beta here.

Otherwise, I like your sampling method.

GboyegaD:


Your analysis is very warped. You have less than 1% of the total number of polling units, nothing is said about how you sampled your polling units, and here you are making inferences that generalizes. This is not right in any way for a Statistician and I am very sure you know this.

Inosky:


There are over 176,000 polling units, and you didn't pick up to a thousand of it, only picked 314, my dear, the validity of your result or conclusion is unacceptable and questionable.

You need at least 50% of the polling units' results selected randomly in all the states before making any claims.
If not, die your false claims.

Poanan:


Obinoscopy, i know u went to Unilag and u did project in final year. What i am not sure of is the type of project u did If it is qualitative or quantitative. Using a sample of 341 out of over 170k is not a good sample at all and not representative. This is a very sensitive matter and sample cannot be used to make an opinion. Ask the auditors sometimes they do 100% depending on the materiality of the item.

If you read my OP thoroughly, you would see I also provided a link that showed my research and sampling protocol. But I will explain my research protocol again here. And I will try to be concise.

I got my sample size using an online sample size calculator. It was calculated using a margin of error of 5%, a confidence level of 95%, a population size of 176000 PUs and a Population Proportion of 28% (that is the percentage of voters that actually voted). For those questioning the representative capability of 314 PUs for a population size of 176000 PUs, I recommend you go read statistical sampling. The beauty of sampling is that it enables you make some deduction about the population without having to studying the entire population.

The most critical aspect of sampling is randomization. This is because while sampling, we must ensure that every member of the population has an equal chance of being selected. The best type of sampling is the simple random sampling which is what I did. However i am aware of the heterogeneity of the 176000 PUs, that is while I also did multistage sampling as well. First I made sure ALL the States (including FCT) were represented in the sample. Within each States, LGA and Wards and PUs were randomly samples (multistage sampling).

So in conclusion, my statistical power is strong. The chances of both type I and type II error is 5%. I am 95% confident of my result. I can say that if you manually collate the results for Rivers State, LP won massively. However APC won fair and square if you collate the results from IREV for all the States, FCT inclusive.

However we all know that there are questions on the veracity of the result sheets on IREV. The veracity will be questioned in the Courts, I'm just using the data provided by INEC to make my inference.

Chochovini:
. Excluding Taraba.

Taraba State was also included in my data.

Obinoscopy:
Taraba State was also included in my data.

. Then do well to delete it pronto cos, Obi swept Taraba from top to bottom.

Beremx:
Peter Obi isn't challenging the results. He is challenging the process that made Tinubu president elect.

That's a smart move.

No. He’s in fact challenging the results.
Don’t mix it up!
That’s a very explicit statement.

Chochovini:
. Then do well to delete it pronto cos, Obi swept Taraba from top to bottom.

Well, that's left for the Courts to decide. I hear Obi is challenging the results in 21 States, I hope he succeeds.

poseidon12:
The reason it was not made seamless was for the APC and INEC to manipulate the figures in favour of Tinubu. Tinubu actually came a distant third. It would be proven in Court.
There was nothing wrong with the BVAS. At my polling unit in Lagos, for the Governorship election, we had to force the INEC staff to upload the results. Initially they wanted to take it to their collation center where they would alter the figures on the pretext of no network. When they realized that people were ready to beat them up, they quickly uploaded the results and were allowed to go.

You apparently don't know nothing about our electioneering process...all these noise is not necessary if you guys understand the process...

Obinoscopy:
Well, that's left for the Courts to decide. I hear Obi is challenging the results in 21 States, I hope he succeeds.

. A BIG Amen Sir.

Obinoscopy:













If you read my OP thoroughly, you would see I also provided a link that showed my research and sampling protocol. But I will explain my research protocol again here. And I will try to be concise.

I got my sample size using an online sample size calculator. It was calculated using a margin of error of 5%, a confidence level of 95%, a population size of 176000 PUs and a Population Proportion of 28% (that is the percentage of voters that actually voted). For those questioning the representative capability of 314 PUs for a population size of 176000 PUs, I recommend you go read statistical sampling. The beauty of sampling is that it enables you make some deduction about the population without having to studying the entire population.

The most critical aspect of sampling is randomization. This is because while sampling, we must ensure that every member of the population has an equal chance of being selected. The best type of sampling is the simple random sampling which is what I did. However i am aware of the heterogeneity of the 176000 PUs, that is while I also did multistage sampling as well. First I made sure ALL the States (including FCT) were represented in the sample. Within each States, LGA and Wards and PUs were randomly samples (multistage sampling).

So in conclusion, my statistical power is strong. am 95% confident of my result. I can say that if you manually collate the results for Rivers State, LP won massively. However APC won fair and square if you collate the results from IREV for all the States, FCT inclusive.

However we all know that there are questions on the veracity of the result sheets on IREV. The veracity will be questioned in the Courts, I'm just using the data provided by INEC to make my inference.

"The chances of both type I and type II error is 5%."

This is highly, highly unlikely (in fact impossible) if your sample size is 300 plus.

Otherwise, you have a solid knowledge of statistics.

tplayer:



"The chances of both type I and type II error is 5%."

This is highly, highly unlikely (in fact impossible) if your sample size is 300 plus.

Otherwise, you have a solid knowledge of statistics.

The formula for sample size calculation is: S = z²*p*(1-p)/e²

Where z is the z-score which is 1.96 for 95% confidence level
p is the population proportion of those who voted which is 28.3%
e is the margin of error which we take as 5%

Solving this will give you a sample size of slightly over 300.

Thus my sample size was more than adequate. The 5% margin of error confirms that my type II error is within 5%. Also my sampling methodology and the entire research protocol demonstrate the power of the study. As regards the possibility of type I error, mere looking at the data, it is obvious there is no type I error. But a confirmatory test can be done using chi-square to test for statistical significant difference between the result I collated from my sample and the result as collated by INEC. The test will reveal that there is no statistical difference with a p-value less than 0.05 (my p-value is actually 0.000031). This explains why I said I am over 95% confident on my result.

I must however repeat my caveat that this study is based on the assumption that the results from IREV are the authentic results. This is being contested in the Courts.

Obinoscopy:
As a statistician, I've always believed in the powers of deductive inference based on sampling.

INEC has uploaded over 94% of the Presidential Results on the IREV Portal. Now there are people who believe that the result announced by INEC is significantly different from the result uploaded on IREV. I decided to randomly select result sheets from IREV and collate. The sample size was 314 result sheets. That sample size was gotten from an online sample size calculator. Click on this link to see my research protocol: https://www.nairaland.com/7614305/statistical-analysis-inec-result-irev

The result is very interesting.

RESULT
So after collating the result sheets from randomly selected 314 polling units, APC got a total of 15394 votes. LP got 10430 votes. NNPP got 2613 votes. And PDP got 11533 votes. So APC got the majority of votes followed by the PDP, then LP and finally NNPP.

This means INEC declaration is in tune with what's uploaded on IREV. However I noticed that the result for Rivers State is very strange. My collated result shows LP has more than 4 times the votes gotten by either APC or PDP.

So in conclusion, the IREV result is almost exactly what INEC declared. The only discrepancy is that of Rivers State. I might have to inspect that of Rivers State even further in my next analysis. But despite the Rivers State discrepancy, APC won fair and square based on the results on IREV Portal. I say this with 95% confidence.

Whether the results from IREV is authentic or not is a matter for another discuss. My focus was just to use the results I saw on the IREV Portal.

APC won via rigging,inec, thuggery,police . All it takes to manipulate the result is to switch one party vote for another and then upload. E.g switch LP 50 votes for APC 10 votes .

Interestinng