[GUT] GREAT UNIVERSAL THEORY

In addition to tracking the dynamics of repetitions between columns, it is necessary to note the frequency of appearance of numbers in the second and third columns.

Shpilevoy wrote:
//////////////////////
A lot about the frequency of numbers coming up =
100pravda.com/forum/roulette-game/675-al...aet-na-voprosy#13601

It talks about "GR" or Geometric Distribution. And that it always happens. For 25 spins.
Shouldn't we consider the period when ALL 37 numbers are drawn as a full field cycle? Is that crazy? But apparently we'll have to work with the 25 numbers that have been drawn...

By the way, something like a frequency "thermometer" in the GUT Tracker program on the right is called "Last hit".
I sense that this is quite an "atom"

Let's do it this way.
The atom/program will track the 25 input spins and shift the frames by +1 new one, the lowest one, with each iteration. The frames can be expanded forward to, say, 111 spins and compressed to the last 10 spins. Columns will also be created to record which group of numbers is repeated most frequently and after how many spins these repetitions occur. This way, stable groups of numbers repeating (at least one number in the group) every 20-25 iterations can be detected. The number of numbers can also be determined in the future, once a stable algorithm is found. 6-9 numbers will be quite sufficient. The trigger for one group can be the emergence of activity in a dormant group.
This will be the new Atom.

If we have statistics of 97 spins and a frame of 15 spins.
The program overlays 6 full frames end to end (from end to beginning) and displays that the numbers 2, 24, 35 are repeated in them.

1) What are the player's actions?
2) How exactly does the size of the frames change or are all 10,11,12,13...97(111) cycled through?
3) Why do you need a frame larger than half of the statistics? At least two should fit for analysis. 97/2 = 48 max.
4) If the program does the analysis itself, it's best to start with the minimum range, and as soon as all the statistics (a series of ranges) yield a non-empty group of numbers (for example, 5 numbers), offer it for processing. Don't overwhelm the player with a ton of options. The smaller the expectation range, the better.

A good name for such an atom is Edwerk or GUT, so as not to get confused.

DLK wrote: If we have statistics of 97 spins and a frame for 15 spins.
The program overlays 6 full frames end to end (from end to beginning) and displays that the numbers are repeated in them: 2, 24, 35....

Not 6 frames, but for each spin, the window shifts 15,0,24,32,17,34,22,5, [2,24,35,0,12,15,33,21,20,24,31,30,2,4,25] and the last number that entered the window is number 25. Next, number 2 leaves the window and the new number that dropped out is attached to 25. And from the beginning of the game, only 21 spins come out for 15 iterations and 15 already made to form the tracking window (you point to 6 frames and 97 (statistics) - 15 (frame) = 82 moves total).
For simplicity, I suggest making windows 25 (2/3); 37 (all numbers on the table) and 111 (all numbers X3).

1) What are the player's actions?

Track the frequency of numbers or sections appearing on the track/table, in this case, on section 82 of the move

2) How exactly does the frame size change or do you cycle through all 10, 11, 12, 13... 97(111)?

The answer is above. Simplified it to three windows.

3) Why do you need a frame larger than half the statistics? At least two should fit for analysis. 97/2 = 48 max limit.

Some numbers go to sleep and wake up. We'll only see this in expanded frames. The statistics/sample should always be several times larger than the window itself; that's logical. Someone might need more data for mathematical analysis. This is how Gonzalo Pelayo works, for example.

4) If the program does the analysis itself, it's better to start with the minimum range, and as soon as all the statistics (a series of ranges) yield a non-empty group of numbers (for example, 5 numbers), offer it for processing. Don't overwhelm the player with a ton of options. The smaller the expectation range, the better.

It's wrong to think in terms of "more/less" in terms of the waiting range or the number of numbers, colleague. I suggest 4 to 6 numbers per workload if it's the Web. But if the numbers are grouped on a track or field, then it's best to use specific sections and be bold.
Each individual instance/game should be treated as an independent event (just like a single spin). This will avoid Atom bias.
Therefore, somewhere there will be only 4, somewhere 5, and in another game there will be 6 numbers in the game.
Forming a trigger is the most important thing now.

Does it work? A frame of up to 5 numbers between repeats? Numbers at the edges of the frame? Infinite statistics or a BRM restart at a new Max Win level?