Appendix and Revision Tools
Formula and Decision Map
A compact map from business questions to quantities, assumptions and actions
Formula and Decision Map
Describe what happened
| Question | Quantity | Audit before use |
|---|---|---|
| What is typical? | ; median for the middle observation | skew, weights, repeated units, missingness |
| What share experienced an event? | eligible denominator, complete follow-up, duplicate rows | |
| How uncertain is a simple rate? | independence and adequate counts; use better interval methods near 0 or 1 | |
| How did a KPI change? | same definition, period and currency; distinguish percent from percentage points | |
| Which stage loses volume? | funnel conversion | ordered eligibility and consistent cohort |
Example: a late rate moving from 8% to 6% falls by 2 percentage points, or 25% relative. State which one.
Predict an unknown outcome
| Question | Quantity | Decision interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| How large is numeric error? | $MAE=n^{-1}\sum | y_i-\hat y_i |
| Are large errors especially costly? | large misses receive quadratic weight | |
| Are probabilities accurate? | Brier | calibration and discrimination together |
| Does ranking separate events? | AUROC or precision–recall curve | ranking over thresholds, not policy value |
| Is a chosen action threshold worthwhile? | act if expected incremental benefit exceeds cost | requires calibrated risk and credible intervention effect |
Always compare with a feasible baseline on data later than training. A lower test error is evidence about the defined population and period, not a permanent property.
Choose an action
| Decision | Core object | Main assumption |
|---|---|---|
| uncertain alternatives | probabilities and consequences are adequate | |
| value of perfect information | perfect, costless and timely information benchmark | |
| constrained allocation | subject to | objective, units and feasible set represent reality |
| one-period inventory | demand distribution and shortage/overage costs are stable | |
| stable flow system | Little's Law | consistent boundary and long-run averages |
| target an intervention | act if | is a credible individual or group treatment-effect estimate |
Optimisation returns the best action inside the stated model. Test excluded constraints, alternative objectives and parameter ranges.
Estimate whether an action caused change
| Design | Estimand or contrast | Key threat |
|---|---|---|
| randomised experiment | under assignment | non-compliance, attrition, spillovers |
| difference in differences | non-parallel counterfactual trends | |
| regression discontinuity | outcome jump at assignment cutoff | manipulation and extrapolation away from cutoff |
| adjusted observation | conditional treated–comparison contrast | unmeasured confounding and weak overlap |
Prediction asks about ; causal analysis asks about . A high predicted risk can coexist with zero treatment effect.
Operate the system
| Layer | Numerator or signal | Denominator or reference |
|---|---|---|
| coverage | eligible cases scored on time | all eligible cases |
| adoption | executed recommendations | delivered or viewed recommendations—state which |
| calibration | observed event rate in a score band | mature, labelled decisions in that band |
| subgroup error | relevant errors for a defined group | actual negatives, positives or predictions according to metric |
| incremental value | outcome difference caused by policy | credible counterfactual, not historical total |
A metric without its denominator, comparison and response rule is not operationally complete.