As listed by the original poster, Senior Member Invisible, for all of his charts that are similar and use the same base numerical data. I bolded and colored the source of his numbers. Simply crunching a distribution statistic for a woman with a set number of partners is easily repeated if you understand the usage of said numbers.
Quote
Limitations1) The woman must select her partners from a random pool. This won’t be the case if she’s a porn star or cruises for men on LPSG.
2) The manner is which the woman chooses a partner must be independent of all her other choices past or future, at least as far as size is concerned (ex: she can’t prescreen future partners based on bad experiences with previous partners who were too small or too large).
3) The proper way to apply this model is to use the sizes that occur in the dating population. This need not be the same as the frequency of occurrence in the general male population. However, the frequency distribution of the former isn’t available so we use the latter as a proxy.
4) The probabilities used are best guesses based on normal distribution assumptions overlain with known percentile information from actual studies (Lifestyles and/or Kinsey where appropriate).
5) The results obtained are dependent on the accuracy of the underlying probabilities used as inputs. In particular, the lower end of the girth scale may suffer from inaccuracies due to measurement errors in the percentile information (i.e. I suspect that some men reporting very low girth measurements are actually reporting width).
6) The results are ostensibly BP. However, interpret them as NBP if you want to be surer.