skip to content »

Xkcd dating pool

So here we have it: if you're not dating at the edge of the bell curve in terms of age (unlike the guy in the webcomic's last panel), your dating pool does go down with age, even though there is a slight rebound between the ages of 40 and 50.I hope you have enjoyed this little analysis as much as I have writing it.

xkcd dating pool-12

So the fact that the range gets pretty large starting somewhere around is based on people past their mid-30s having enough life under their belt to make good decisions for themselves.What if instead we assumed a more "normal" rule for dating bounds, say - 5 years.We can easily plot this curve to see what it looks like.Another interesting trend is how men aren’t even close to reaching the upper bound of the zone of non-creepiness.According to the Standard Creepiness Rule, it’d be perfectly fine for a 30-year-old man to date a 45-year-old woman, but apparently 30-year-old men are already struggling with the idea of dating a 37-year-old!When computed, the interval can be found to be equal to $\fracage - 14$.

Therefore, what I would call "the dating pool paradox" results from two factors that have inverse effects on the dating pool: Figures such as the ones said to exist in the comic can indeed be found on the interwebz:

The data is given as the number of singles within an age category bounded by lower and upper ages.

As an example, there are 7993 thousand singles of both sexes between the ages of 18 and 19.

As you can see, the comic mentions some analysis involving census bureau data and dating pools.

Our goal in this post is to replicate the analysis that leads to these curves.

I came up with this: The distance between y = x and the asymptote is about 10 years, meaning a 40 year old can date a 33 year old, but a 50 year old can only date a 40 year old. I mean, I agree that the forumla is flawed, but I disagree on where the flaws start.