Information on Protocol for Pavel Ziborov Applicant

Protocol modification

August 8, 2008
This is a modification of the previous protocol to address issues raised by JREF in regard to simplifying the procedure and using fewer photos. Other elements not previously questioned by JREF are not addressed here, although we understand they remain to be negotiated.

This test requires Pavel to identify photographs in sealed envelopes.


Test Procedure:
The test will consist of two trials (A & B) each of 30 attempts at identification.

For each trial:

1. One pair of photographs, numbered photographs 1 and 2 will be visible and unsealed.

2. Tester will hand Pavel one sealed pair of envelopes containing the same pictures as the visible photographs .

3. After handling the pair of sealed envelopes, Pavel will select one envelope and clearly announce the number of the picture contained inside of the envelope. The second envelope will be set aside. Then the chosen envelope will be opened. If the photo is correctly identified the tester will record “correct.”

4. The remaining envelope of two will not be opened until the conclusion of the second trial.

5. All materials from the set will be set aside.

6. A new pair of two photos in sealed envelopes will be handed to Pavel and procedures 2 through 5 will be repeated for ten pairs.

7. After every ten pairs, the tester will switch to a different set of photographs.

At the end of 30 pairs, the tester will announce the score. Pavel succeeds at the trial if he receives 24 or more scores of “correct”.

Pavel succeeds at the preliminary challenge if he succeeds at either trial A or trial B.
 
August 8, 2008
This is a modification of the previous protocol to address issues raised by JREF in regard to simplifying the procedure and using fewer photos. Other elements not previously questioned by JREF are not addressed here, although we understand they remain to be negotiated.

This test requires Pavel to identify photographs in sealed envelopes.


Test Procedure:
The test will consist of two trials (A & B) each of 30 attempts at identification.

For each trial:

1. One pair of photographs, numbered photographs 1 and 2 will be visible and unsealed.

2. Tester will hand Pavel one sealed pair of envelopes containing the same pictures as the visible photographs .

3. After handling the pair of sealed envelopes, Pavel will select one envelope and clearly announce the number of the picture contained inside of the envelope. The second envelope will be set aside. Then the chosen envelope will be opened. If the photo is correctly identified the tester will record “correct.”

4. The remaining envelope of two will not be opened until the conclusion of the second trial.

5. All materials from the set will be set aside.

6. A new pair of two photos in sealed envelopes will be handed to Pavel and procedures 2 through 5 will be repeated for ten pairs.

7. After every ten pairs, the tester will switch to a different set of photographs.

At the end of 30 pairs, the tester will announce the score. Pavel succeeds at the trial if he receives 24 or more scores of “correct”.

Pavel succeeds at the preliminary challenge if he succeeds at either trial A or trial B.
With this protocol, according to my calculation, the odds of Pavel succeeding by random chance is less than 1 in 700. I think that is overly stringent for the preliminary challenge. Further, his ability, if it exists, may be more "steady as she goes" as opposed to spectacular. So, at a minimum, I think he should succeed at the preliminary challenge if he does either what you propose or if he gets at least 40 out of 60 correct in both trials combined. The odds of doing this are about 1 in 150, and the odds of doing either what you propose or this are about 1 in 125, according to my calculation.
 
What is the purpose of the second trial?

And again, I really need for us to move along one continuous thread. That means we propose a SINGLE protocol and work at it, not the results of several different ones.

If we are going to do this negotiating publicly, this is going to have to be much clearer than if it was an e-mail exchange taking place between two people.
 
Also, why set aside the other photo in the pair after one is shown to be correct or incorrect? If all the pairs are the same, then he is predicting *both* photos in *both* envelopes by predicting one.

So when you say 24 out of 30, you mean 24 PAIRS wherein both are correct, because they would necessarily HAVE to be. If one is right, so is the other.

There is no way the JREF is going to agree to two shots at this. That increases the probability of getting one of the sets above random chance.

I'll have to run the numbers by the statistician and let you know.

Pavel, will you be in the US on August 31st?
 
Also, why set aside the other photo in the pair after one is shown to be correct or incorrect? If all the pairs are the same, then he is predicting *both* photos in *both* envelopes by predicting one.

So when you say 24 out of 30, you mean 24 PAIRS wherein both are correct, because they would necessarily HAVE to be. If one is right, so is the other.

There is no way the JREF is going to agree to two shots at this. That increases the probability of getting one of the sets above random chance.

I'll have to run the numbers by the statistician and let you know.

Pavel, will you be in the US on August 31st?

Thank you.

To set a side the photos, for a reason that I don’t want to see the other photo that I am naming.. as when I hold the envelope I am trying to predict wht will I see when it will be open, if we have to open both, than I will see both photos and might be wrong in order of two that dos not make sense.

When I say 24 it means 24 times I name exact envelope of two. ( 24 pairs out of 30)

Well, why it is higher chance? As there each result of the trial will be considered as independent and not summed up..

Well.. Ok maybe we could leave second trial..Though having 2 would reduce stress for me.. Though I understand that it is more psychological thing.. if there is now way.. just that I would take more time for 1 to make sure that I am sure in every answer to be given.. like if I am not sure the pair shell be put a side and I will try to re identify it again after the other done etc.

NO I am leaving US on 27th of August, have my tickets already.


p.s.
So as you say we must stick to one protocol..
Fair enough.. Than if the test with pair is more or less considered as possible.. even if we have to drop second trial.. and have only one.. OK.. than, I will prepare new test protocol propose with Startz with more details and s post it so u can review it and check it with statisticians etc.
 
Last edited:
Also, why set aside the other photo in the pair after one is shown to be correct or incorrect? If all the pairs are the same, then he is predicting *both* photos in *both* envelopes by predicting one.

So when you say 24 out of 30, you mean 24 PAIRS wherein both are correct, because they would necessarily HAVE to be. If one is right, so is the other.

There is no way the JREF is going to agree to two shots at this. That increases the probability of getting one of the sets above random chance.

I'll have to run the numbers by the statistician and let you know.

Pavel, will you be in the US on August 31st?


Remie:

The chances of success if two trials are allowed is 0.0014304. Really, there is not a problem with the statistics. There may well be other elements that are problematic.

Why set aside the unopened photo? Why immediately check whether a pair is a success? Only because Pavel says that's how his power works. Shouldn't we accommodate him in these matters, so long as JREF can be sure that the requests we don't understand don't lead to trickery or other problems?

Pavel:

Remie has suggested that negotiations would proceed much more smoothly if they were conducted by email. I strongly urge you to use email or private messages. There are two reasons:

(1) Remie has demonstrated that she is working hard to make your challenge come off. She is much more experienced than anyone else here about the most effective way to conduct these negotiations. You should listen to her advice.

(2) JREF and challengers may have an adversary relation about the outcome of the trial. That need not apply to working out the details of a protocol. In terms of the issues that have been raised so far by JREF (not all issues have been worked through of course) there is no reason a protocal can't be worked out in a few days. So on process issues you should do what Remie asks.
 
With this protocol, according to my calculation, the odds of Pavel succeeding by random chance is less than 1 in 700. I think that is overly stringent for the preliminary challenge.
You mean because other preliminary tests have not been as stringent? That could be right.

Further, his ability, if it exists, may be more "steady as she goes" as opposed to spectacular.
It is up to Pavel to state what he can do. The less certain his ability is, the more envelopes will be needed per session, making the test longer and more tiring.
 
With this protocol, according to my calculation, the odds of Pavel succeeding by random chance is less than 1 in 700. I think that is overly stringent for the preliminary challenge.

The standard chance of success has always been 1 in 1000, so this would actually be much less stringent that usual.

Further, his ability, if it exists, may be more "steady as she goes" as opposed to spectacular. So, at a minimum, I think he should succeed at the preliminary challenge if he does either what you propose or if he gets at least 40 out of 60 correct in both trials combined. The odds of doing this are about 1 in 150, and the odds of doing either what you propose or this are about 1 in 125, according to my calculation.

And this would be much, much too high a chance of winning by chance alone. The thing is, it shouldn't matter to Pavel what the probability of winning by chance is. If he actually does have the ability he claims, then chance doesn't come in to it. The only way chance matters is if he actually can't do what he claims, and then the JREF must ensure that he doesn't win anyway.
 
The thing is, it shouldn't matter to Pavel what the probability of winning by chance is. If he actually does have the ability he claims, then chance doesn't come in to it. The only way chance matters is if he actually can't do what he claims, and then the JREF must ensure that he doesn't win anyway.

This is something that's always bothered me about those who state that the chance of success is too small. It's only too small if you can only succeed by chance.

If the JREF were to allow me to apply for the challenge on the basis of my ability to do long division, I wouldn't care how difficult it would be for me to succeed by chance. My only concern would be if I could accidently lose by making a stupid mistake, because I can do long division. I'll be glad to do 100 long division problems with multiple choice answers. I can get (almost) everyone of them right.
 
The standard chance of success has always been 1 in 1000, so this would actually be much less stringent that usual.
Can you document that the 1 in 1000 odds standard has been used for previous applicants in the preliminary test?

And this would be much, much too high a chance of winning by chance alone.
But this is only the preliminary test -- Pavel wins nothing by passing the preliminary test. Obviously, the odds standard should be much higher for the final test -- 1 in a million odds seems reasonable to me.

The thing is, it shouldn't matter to Pavel what the probability of winning by chance is. If he actually does have the ability he claims, then chance doesn't come in to it. The only way chance matters is if he actually can't do what he claims, and then the JREF must ensure that he doesn't win anyway.
This is what you and so many others here keep missing: If Pavel or anyone else can perform at a vastly above chance level (say 1 in a 100 million, consisting of 1 in 100 in the preliminary test and 1 in 1 million in the final test) in foolproof testing, that essentially confirms a paranormal ability, even if his hit rate is only, say, 60% versus an expected hit rate of 50%.
 
Can you document that the 1 in 1000 odds standard has been used for previous applicants in the preliminary test?

But this is only the preliminary test -- Pavel wins nothing by passing the preliminary test. Obviously, the odds standard should be much higher for the final test -- 1 in a million odds seems reasonable to me.

This is what you and so many others here keep missing: If Pavel or anyone else can perform at a vastly above chance level (say 1 in a 100 million, consisting of 1 in 100 in the preliminary test and 1 in 1 million in the final test) in foolproof testing, that essentially confirms a paranormal ability, even if his hit rate is only, say, 60% versus an expected hit rate of 50%.

You will find it stated in this thread by the JREF's representative that they are aiming for 1/1000 odds, although they are willing to compromise if necessary.

If you wish to discuss the challenge in general and what you think it should and should not do, please discuss it somewhere else. Do not derail this thread.
 
You mean because other preliminary tests have not been as stringent? That could be right.


It is up to Pavel to state what he can do. The less certain his ability is, the more envelopes will be needed per session, making the test longer and more tiring.

This seems to be a signature feature of all these "abilities" -- they are so fugacious as to be almost nonexistent.


M.
 
New Pavel Protocol

Pavel has prepared a new protocol which I have lightly edited. As requested, the protocol has been emailed to JREF. I anticipate that negotiations will be conducted by email. I am posting the latest version so that folks outside JREF can see what is going on. I will not be posting any back-and-forth between Pavel and JREF unless the parties want me to.

In the protocol below, "I" refers to Pavel.

Proposed Pavel Protocol - August 7, 2008

Propose of the protocol to test my claiming powers.

This test requires Pavel to identify photographs in sealed envelopes.

Without looking in any possible- physical ways inside of the sealed envelope, just by holding it between my hands, I will be able to identify the photo that will be inside and will name it.
During a trial with 40 pairs, I will get at least 30 correct out of 40 photos to which I will offer my answer. If I get less than 30 correct, I accept that I was not able to perform my abilities successfully under/according the conditions and the protocol that was agreed before the test and that the test results are negative. With 30 or more correct photos, the test result is positive.

Materials required:
Materials for each pair: 2 highly distinguishable photographs, with a unique name for the image. 2 identical small envelopes. 2 identical Manila envelopes.

The photographs are to be produced in four sets of ten identical pairs.

Photographs are to be approximately 3.5 x 5 inches and will be printed from the files that I will provide in advance.

Paper sheet with the photos that will be used in pairs and the name and number to each of the photo.

Environment stipulations:

No talking or any kind of distraction with light or sound or any other ways of interruption during the test. No photography during the test will be allowed as the flash or the sound produced by the camera can be distracting.

No trickery, or cheating from either Pavel or JREF or other parties present in room during the test. The environment should be established to give me the best chance of success and JREF the assurance that my abilities are real.

No substance with a strong odor will be allowed in the room same, include people who might use perfume that has strong odor and that can cause distraction during the concentration and a headache due to the strong smell.

It is important that in the room where the test will be held, there should be NO photos or pictures of any kind on the walls or anywhere near me and visible to me.

What Will Constitute a Successful Test:

If I am able to identify 30 or more photos out of 40 pairs of sealed envelopes.


List of the photographs that will be used in pairs. (I might still change some of the photos)

1. The cross
2. Ship “Titanic”
3. Egyptian pyramids
4. Photo of the Planet Earth

Can be seen here www.jaimypage.narod.ru

Preparation:

The photos will be placed in envelopes in separate room by a third party with the supervision of a JREF representatives who will make sure that there will be no interference in the process of preparation of the photo pairs for the test. Each of the 2 photos is placed in a different small envelope and sealed. Each of these small envelopes is placed in a different manila envelope and sealed. The envelopes will be checked for marks, folds, creases etc by JREF representatives before being brought into the test room.


Test settings:

After I am situated, ready, and comfortable, I will cover my eyes with a mask and my ears with the plugs and will have up to 10 minutes to get ready and relax.

After that, the testing shell begin, and one random pair of 2 shell be handed to me.


The test.

The envelopes arranged in four groups with 10 pairs in each, will be prepared to be used in test.

1. One pair of photographs, numbered photographs 1 and 2 will be visible and unsealed.

2. Tester will hand Pavel one sealed pair of envelopes containing the same pictures as the visible photographs .

3. After handling the pair of sealed envelopes, Pavel will select one envelope and clearly announce the number of the picture contained inside of the envelope. The second envelope will be set aside. Then the chosen envelope will be opened. If the photo is correctly identified the tester will record “correct.”

4. The remaining envelope will not be opened until the conclusion of the whole trial.

5. All materials from the set will be set aside. (Removed from the table)

6. A new pair of two photos in sealed envelopes will be handed to Pavel and procedures 2 through 5 will be repeated for ten pairs.

7. After every ten pairs, the tester will switch to a different set of photographs.

At the end of 40 pairs, the tester will announce the score. Pavel succeeds at the trial if he receives 30 or more scores of “correct”.

I would need small breaks of 3-5 minutes brake from time to time between pairs… probably after each 3 or 5 or as needed. (Depending on how I feel).

I would need up to 10 minutes break between every 10 sets.

For identification of each pair I would take up to 3 minutes before I would offer my answer.

The entire test will not take more than 4 - 5 hours including all breaks.

Remarks:

* I need to know the result of my answer immediately after I name the photos. I need this because, when I hold the envelopes I am trying to foresee what will I actually see when the photo will be revealed. By asking myself – “What picture will I see when the envelope will be open”. For this reason, it is important for me and necessary to see the actual photo immediately after I offer my answers during the test.

** If I am not sure of my answer, the pair shall be put aside and I will get back to identification of it, later after the rest of the pairs of the current run on 10 will be named.

*** After each 10 pairs, the photos will be switched to a different set. For the first run of 10 pairs, the pair will be made of 2 photos, The Cross and The Planet Earth. For the second run of 10 it should be The Titanic and the Egyptian Pyramids. For the third run of 10 it is, The Cross and the Egyptian pyramids. And for the fourth run of 10 it is, The planet Earth and the Cross.
Changing the pairs, will help me to avoid extra confusion that could be caused by repetition of the same photos used in pairs for many times. The order of the pairs is not a final and might be changed to a different before the final protocol will be agreed.

Notes:

1. No talking (or signaling!) during the test from any person who will be present in room.

2. No text messaging or phone calls allowed, as the sms and call alerts can distract my concentration and affect the result of my answer. (The smsing during the test is not permitted either, as the sound of the constantly clicking buttons can be very irritating and distracting). For that reason, all mobile phones in the room, must be switched to a silent mode to eliminate interruptions of the testing. If anyone needs to make calls or sms, it can be done during the brake between runs

3. Any person that is present at the testing may raise his or her hand during the demonstration to inform the others of suspicious behavior of anyone in the room. However, no shouting or interruptions will be allowed during the process of identifying the photo. If there are any doubts or suspicions, the person shall raise his/her hand silently and inform the others after I have finished with identification of the current photo and announced my answer.

I would prefer:

1. I want to do the test in the United States, in Charlotte, North Carolina to avoid traveling that can affect my state due to the road sickness or the climate change. Testing should be done in the presence of objective people which both as JREF and I can trust. I want to be able to approve the people that are present during the testing, e.g. it can’t be more than 10 people in the room during the test.

2. I want to bring with me a friend Vladimir Sirovitskiy who will be present at the testing as a support.
After the test will start, there will be no talking or any kind of communication between us until the test will be complete and the last photo will be identified and announced.

3. I also would like Dr. Eric D. Heggestad, and Dr. Linda Shanock, the academics that tested me to produce affidavit letters for application for the challenge, to be present during the test (if they are able to attend it) as the independent parties and witnesses–supervisors.

4. I would like the testing to take place in the afternoon, as I would need time to have rest and sleep enough hours and get ready for the test. (As due to the stress with the upcoming test I might have a problem to sleep) For example, it can start at 1 pm where I will arrive at 12 noon, an hour before.

5. I would prefer the weather conditions to be good at the day of testing, as I am sensitive to the low atmospheric pressure and often get headaches, feel low and tired when it is cloudy and the atmospheric pressure is low.
 
5. I would prefer the weather conditions to be good at the day of testing, as I am sensitive to the low atmospheric pressure and often get headaches, feel low and tired when it is cloudy and the atmospheric pressure is low.
[/indent]
This looks like a non-starter, if you're saying that you may not perform as well during low atmospheric pressure.
 
This is what you and so many others here keep missing: If Pavel or anyone else can perform at a vastly above chance level (say 1 in a 100 million, consisting of 1 in 100 in the preliminary test and 1 in 1 million in the final test) in foolproof testing, that essentially confirms a paranormal ability, even if his hit rate is only, say, 60% versus an expected hit rate of 50%.

Fortunately, Pavel is claiming an accuracy of 75% in the current protocol, not 60%.

However, it is worth noting that in the affidavit tests, Pavel's overall hit rate was only 2/3. If Pavel were claiming that as his accuracy, then to establish it to odds of 1:1000 would require at least 62 hits out of 93 pairs of envelopes. Based on the time allowances in the current protocol, that would require a full day of testing, which I agree would be too arduous for the preliminary test.
 
Fortunately, Pavel is claiming an accuracy of 75% in the current protocol, not 60%.

However, it is worth noting that in the affidavit tests, Pavel's overall hit rate was only 2/3. If Pavel were claiming that as his accuracy, then to establish it to odds of 1:1000 would require at least 62 hits out of 93 pairs of envelopes. Based on the time allowances in the current protocol, that would require a full day of testing, which I agree would be too arduous for the preliminary test.
So let's suppose Pavel gets 29 out of 40 envelopes correct. Will the JREF want to see him re-tested before the MDC ends, or will they say that his failure constitutes more proof that there is no such thing as the paranormal?
 
So let's suppose Pavel gets 29 out of 40 envelopes correct. Will the JREF want to see him re-tested before the MDC ends, or will they say that his failure constitutes more proof that there is no such thing as the paranormal?
Please show me a quote from Randi that claims that the MDC proves there is no such thing as the paranormal. If you want to interpret it this way, fine, but don't put words in other people's mouths.

IXP
 
Last edited:
Please show me a quote from Randi that claims that the MDC proves there is no such thing as the paranormal. If you want to interpret it this way, fine, but don't put words in other people's mouths.

IXP
"Concerning the challenge, I always have an 'out': I'm right!"

By the way, if Pavel does get 29 out of 40 envelopes right, do you think he should be re-tested?
 
By the way, if Pavel does get 29 out of 40 envelopes right, do you think he should be re-tested?

I don't speak for JREF, but I am 99% certain that they will only consider success to be what's agreed to as a standard for success. If they agree that 30 out of 40 constitutes success, then 29 out of 40 will be a failure, period. At that point, Pavel would be welcome to reapply a year later (if the MDC is still going on).
 

Back
Top Bottom