# How often do you need each number?

Well, I’m buying house numbers, and I notice a really strange distribution to what they include in a pack, leaving me wondering how they reach their implicit conclusion:

number | pack includes _ of ‘em |
---|---|

0 | 3 |

1 | 4 |

2 | 4 |

3 | 3 |

4 | 2 |

5 | 3 |

6 | 2 |

7 | 2 |

8 | 2 |

9 | 2 |

Ya, what the hell, am I right?

What is this? How do you come up with that.

Is this really what Benford’s Law, et cetera, really lead to?

Why would house numbers *have a lot of 5s* in them? Do they number by 5s somewhere? I don’t think I’ve ever seen that. Bizarre.

I’m not really complaining, seeing as how I really need 1s and 2s and occasionally a 3 & 0, it’s just odd.

I’ll just take this as a real-world Benford’s law adjustment. This is, quite literally, the hardware store interpretation of scale-invariant digit frequency of appearance. Bumford’s, maybe Bumford’s law states basically Benford’s but you have *a lot of 5s*, for some bizarre reason, and maybe extra 2s just in case. Perhaps a formal statement would give a +1 fudge factor to any prime factors of the base, on top of the difference-of-logarithms that Benford’s gets you.