Background

This analysis is based on an older version of our inference model which is accurate but more difficult to read

Question

Who did Nisha talk to on Adnan's cell phone at 3:32 PM, January 13?

14 Dec, 2016

This topic is part of a broader analysis on

Serial: Who killed Hae Min Lee?

Scenarios

Calculated Conclusions

Conclusions

1

Adnan and Jay:

Nisha

talked to both Adnan and Jay during that phone call.

2

Pocket dial:

Nisha

didn't talk to either of them; Jay called her by mistake.

3

Jay:

Nisha

talked only to Jay during that phone call.

4

Call didn't happen:

Nisha

didn't talk to either of them; there was no call.

Implied plausibility

Likelihoods based only on other elements of the analysis, not considering evidence of this sub-topic.

Adnan and Jay

19%

Pocket dial

14%

Jay

13%

Call didn't happen

54%

Compatibility with evidence

Likelihoods based only on evidence of this sub-topic, assuming all hypotheses equally plausible.

Adnan and Jay

62%

Pocket dial

27%

Jay

10%

Call didn't happen

0.002%

Conclusion

Final likelihoods, combining plausibility and evidence.

Adnan and Jay

62%

Pocket dial

27%

Jay

10%

Call didn't happen

0.002%

Analysis

Evidence (2 items)

A call from Adnan's phone to

Nisha

's phone at 3:32 PM on January 13, 1999 lasted 2:22 minutes.

Sources: Cell phone call log

Adnan and Jay

47%

Pocket dial

33%

Jay

20%

Call didn't happen

0.0007%

Adnan and Jay

47%

Pocket dial

33%

Jay

20%

Call didn't happen

0.0007%

Nisha

said that she talked to both Adnan and Jay on the phone while they were at the video store that Jay worked in.

Sources: Serial

Adnan and Jay

30%

Pocket dial

26%

Jay

17%

Call didn't happen

26%

Adnan and Jay

30%

Pocket dial

26%

Jay

17%

Call didn't happen

26%

Discussion

This topic is part of a broader analysis. To view the discussion page of the main analysis, click below:

Serial: Who killed Hae Min Lee?

userIcon

Rootclaim Content Policy

Rootclaim Launches Open Analysis Platform That Surpasses Human Reasoning

A substantial body of research has shown that the human brain is unreliable when it comes to accurately assessing complex problems. This means the only way to navigate a sea of half-truths is to complement humanity's fallible intuition with objective probabilistic analysis.

Anti-Fraud Experts Launch News-Accuracy Site, Find U.S. Probably Blamed Wrong Side for Syria Chemical Attack

In applying the fraud-detection approach, Rootclaim seeks to break news events into similar bite-sized pieces and assign values to the individual pieces of evidence, factoring for uncertainty and source reliability. The individual pieces are then loaded into an algorithm that draws big-picture conclusions.

Fighting Fake News - Proof and Probability

The crowd can always improve, can always check everything. It’s like an open-source software. Addressing all the evidence and details of these issues requires research and we rely on the horsepower of the crowd to get it done.

Richard Gutjahr

Fact or Fiction? Israeli Startup Pops Fake News Conspiracy Bubbles

The basic reason that we fail at reaching sound conclusions for complex problems is that we base our decisions on filtered information, cherry-picked evidence from biased and interested sources, which is implicitly filtered by us. On top of that, there are a slew of situations where human intuition fails us miserably.

Huffington Post

Anti-Fraud Experts Launch News-Accuracy Site, Find U.S. Probably Blamed Wrong Side for Syria Chemical Attack

In applying the fraud-detection approach, Rootclaim seeks to break news events into similar bite-sized pieces and assign values to the individual pieces of evidence, factoring for uncertainty and source reliability. The individual pieces are then loaded into an algorithm that draws big-picture conclusions.

Fact or Fiction? Israeli Startup Pops Fake News Conspiracy Bubbles

The basic reason that we fail at reaching sound conclusions for complex problems is that we base our decisions on filtered information, cherry-picked evidence from biased and interested sources, which is implicitly filtered by us. On top of that, there are a slew of situations where human intuition fails us miserably.

Huffington Post