Just because it's approximated by a bell curve doesn't make it a bell curve. There are quite obvious separate phenomena shaping the curve at different times.
reply> just because it's approximated by a bell curve doesn't make it a bell curve
replyI'm going to assume this is bait...
Bell curves are probability distributions. This is a time series, so it can’t be a bell curve. It just has the same shape.
replyAre you discarding the utility of Gaussian functions in analysis simply because the independent variable is time? A Gaussian curve can be used as a descriptive model without claiming that the observations themselves are a probability distribution
replyThe fit does not prove causation, but it does show that the decline was already well described by a trend that began years before generative AI. If the claim is that 2023 created a separate structural break, it's different claim then the title describes
You can't call it a bell curve unless it's from the Charles Murray region. It's just sparkling statistics.
replyDo you mean "just because it's a bell curve, doesn't make it a normal distribution"?
replyNo, I meant what I said.
replydeleted
replyThose graphs look nothing alike, except for "going up and then vaguely going down."
replyI don't know what to say other than learn math
reply