Statistics, Anomalies, and Investigative Evidence
An interview and research series in development
The core question
How should investigators distinguish a statistically unusual event from an evidentially meaningful one? The answer depends on data quality, baseline assumptions, alternative explanations, and corroboration.
Questions for academic specialists
What constitutes a defensible comparison group? How should small samples and multiple testing be handled? When do predictive models become unreliable? What should a trier of fact understand about model uncertainty?
Editorial status
This is a proposed interview framework, not a completed interview. No academic expert has been quoted or represented as participating.
What readers should take away
Quantitative methods can sharpen inquiry, but claims about wrongdoing require independently verified evidence and appropriately qualified interpretation.
Engagement perspective
INTELL RISK & ADVISORY GROUP brings evidence-based analysis to fraud, forensic accounting, investigations, litigation support, internal audit, and complex accounting matters. For a confidential initial discussion, please use the contact section on our homepage. Do not send privileged or sensitive documents through unverified channels.