FreeStatistics.org

Free Statistics

of Irreproducible Research!

Description of Statistical Computation

Author's title

Author*The author of this computation has been verified*
R Software Modulerwasp_hypothesismean1.wasp
Title produced by softwareTesting Mean with known Variance - Critical Value
Date of computationWed, 12 Nov 2008 12:40:17 -0700
Cite this page as followsStatistical Computations at FreeStatistics.org, Office for Research Development and Education, URL https://freestatistics.org/blog/index.php?v=date/2008/Nov/12/t12265188975m948b0xr4rp1rd.htm/, Retrieved Sun, 19 May 2024 11:39:40 +0000
Statistical Computations at FreeStatistics.org, Office for Research Development and Education, URL https://freestatistics.org/blog/index.php?pk=24412, Retrieved Sun, 19 May 2024 11:39:40 +0000
QR Codes:

Original text written by user:
IsPrivate?No (this computation is public)
User-defined keywordsJonas Scheltjens
Estimated Impact131

Tree of Dependent Computations

Family? (F = Feedback message, R = changed R code, M = changed R Module, P = changed Parameters, D = changed Data)
F       [Testing Mean with known Variance - Critical Value] [Case: the Pork Qu...] [2008-11-12 19:40:17] [f4960a11bac8b7f1cb71c83b5826d5bd] [Current]
Feedback Forum
2008-11-16 10:54:29 [Charis Berrevoets] [reply] 
Je gebruikt de juiste berekeningsmethode en je hebt ook gelijk dat je de 2-zijdige test moet berekenen omdat we willen nagaan of het vetpercentage niet te hoog of niet te laag is. We moeten inderdaad ook geen klacht indienen, maar hier geef je een foute verklaring voor. Het steekproefgemiddelde (15,46%) overtreft de kritische waarde niet (1-zijdige test) en ligt tussen de grenzen van het 95%-betrouwbaarheidsinterval (2-zijdige test). Dit duidt erop dat het steekproefgemiddelde correct is en niet op toeval berust, en dat het niet te hoog is (geen klacht dus). Dat de kritische waarde tussen de grenzen van het betrouwbaarheidsinterval ligt is irrelevant, dat zijn immers 2 verschillende testen.
2008-11-24 18:31:52 [Kevin Vermeiren] [reply] 
2008-11-24 18:35:24 [Kevin Vermeiren] [reply] 
Het klopt inderdaad dat er beter geen klacht ingediend wordt. De keuze voor de 2-sided test werd echter niet beargumenteerd. Ook kon men hier kiezen voor de 1-sided test omdat men zou kunnen veronderstellen dat enkel hier de producent een economisch voordeel zou kunnen behalen. De keuze voor de 2-sided test kan gestaafd worden met het feit dat het vlees teveel of te weinig vet kan bevatten waardoor we dus 2 grenzen hebben. Het is niet de kritieke waarde die binnen het betrouwbaarheidsinterval moet liggen maar het steekproefgemiddelde (=sample mean) Dit is hier het geval, dus kunnen we spreken dat het verschil niet significant is. Bijgevolg is de afwijking ten opzichte van het contractueel afgesproken vetgehalte, 15%, toe te schrijven aan toeval. Bij de 1-sided test komen we tot dezelfde conclusie. Het steekproefgemiddelde ligt ook hier lager dan de kritieke waarde (one-tailed). Tengevolge hiervan gaan we dus ook hier de nul hypothese niet verwerpen. Als algemene conclusie kan er gezegd worden dat er geen klacht ingediend wordt daar de afwijking niet significant is.

Post a new message

Dataset

Tables (Output of Computation)





Summary of computational transaction
Raw Inputview raw input (R code)
Raw Outputview raw output of R engine
Computing time2 seconds
R Server'Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher' @ 193.190.124.24

\begin{tabular}{lllllllll}
\hline
Summary of computational transaction \tabularnewline
Raw Input & view raw input (R code)  \tabularnewline
Raw Output & view raw output of R engine  \tabularnewline
Computing time & 2 seconds \tabularnewline
R Server & 'Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher' @ 193.190.124.24 \tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
%Source: https://freestatistics.org/blog/index.php?pk=24412&T=0

[TABLE]
[ROW][C]Summary of computational transaction[/C][/ROW]
[ROW][C]Raw Input[/C][C]view raw input (R code) [/C][/ROW]
[ROW][C]Raw Output[/C][C]view raw output of R engine [/C][/ROW]
[ROW][C]Computing time[/C][C]2 seconds[/C][/ROW]
[ROW][C]R Server[/C][C]'Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher' @ 193.190.124.24[/C][/ROW]
[/TABLE]
Source: https://freestatistics.org/blog/index.php?pk=24412&T=0

Globally Unique Identifier (entire table): ba.freestatistics.org/blog/index.php?pk=24412&T=0

As an alternative you can also use a QR Code:  
QR Code


The GUIDs for individual cells are displayed in the table below:

Summary of computational transaction
Raw Inputview raw input (R code)
Raw Outputview raw output of R engine
Computing time2 seconds
R Server'Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher' @ 193.190.124.24






Testing Mean with known Variance
sample size27
population variance0.012
sample mean0.1546
null hypothesis about mean0.15
type I error0.05
critical value (one-tailed)0.184676559191704
confidence interval (two-tailed)(sample mean)[ 0.113280331179696 , 0.195919668820304 ]
conclusion for one-tailed test
Do not reject the null hypothesis.
conclusion for two-tailed test
Do not reject the null hypothesis

\begin{tabular}{lllllllll}
\hline
Testing Mean with known Variance \tabularnewline
sample size & 27 \tabularnewline
population variance & 0.012 \tabularnewline
sample mean & 0.1546 \tabularnewline
null hypothesis about mean & 0.15 \tabularnewline
type I error & 0.05 \tabularnewline
critical value (one-tailed) & 0.184676559191704 \tabularnewline
confidence interval (two-tailed)(sample mean) & [ 0.113280331179696 ,  0.195919668820304 ] \tabularnewline
conclusion for one-tailed test \tabularnewline
Do not reject the null hypothesis. \tabularnewline
conclusion for two-tailed test \tabularnewline
Do not reject the null hypothesis \tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
%Source: https://freestatistics.org/blog/index.php?pk=24412&T=1

[TABLE]
[ROW][C]Testing Mean with known Variance[/C][/ROW]
[ROW][C]sample size[/C][C]27[/C][/ROW]
[ROW][C]population variance[/C][C]0.012[/C][/ROW]
[ROW][C]sample mean[/C][C]0.1546[/C][/ROW]
[ROW][C]null hypothesis about mean[/C][C]0.15[/C][/ROW]
[ROW][C]type I error[/C][C]0.05[/C][/ROW]
[ROW][C]critical value (one-tailed)[/C][C]0.184676559191704[/C][/ROW]
[ROW][C]confidence interval (two-tailed)(sample mean)[/C][C][ 0.113280331179696 ,  0.195919668820304 ][/C][/ROW]
[ROW][C]conclusion for one-tailed test[/C][/ROW]
[ROW][C]Do not reject the null hypothesis.[/C][/ROW]
[ROW][C]conclusion for two-tailed test[/C][/ROW]
[ROW][C]Do not reject the null hypothesis[/C][/ROW]
[/TABLE]
Source: https://freestatistics.org/blog/index.php?pk=24412&T=1

Globally Unique Identifier (entire table): ba.freestatistics.org/blog/index.php?pk=24412&T=1

As an alternative you can also use a QR Code:  
QR Code


The GUIDs for individual cells are displayed in the table below:

Testing Mean with known Variance
sample size27
population variance0.012
sample mean0.1546
null hypothesis about mean0.15
type I error0.05
critical value (one-tailed)0.184676559191704
confidence interval (two-tailed)(sample mean)[ 0.113280331179696 , 0.195919668820304 ]
conclusion for one-tailed test
Do not reject the null hypothesis.
conclusion for two-tailed test
Do not reject the null hypothesis


Figures (Output of Computation)

Input Parameters & R Code

Parameters (Session):
par1 = 27 ; par2 = 0.012 ; par3 = 0.1546 ; par4 = 0.15 ; par5 = 0.05 ;
Parameters (R input):
par1 = 27 ; par2 = 0.012 ; par3 = 0.1546 ; par4 = 0.15 ; par5 = 0.05 ;
R code (references can be found in the software module):
par1<-as.numeric(par1)
par2<-as.numeric(par2)
par3<-as.numeric(par3)
par4<-as.numeric(par4)
par5<-as.numeric(par5)
c <- 'NA'
csn <- abs(qnorm(par5))
csn2 <- abs(qnorm(par5/2))
if (par3 == par4)
{
conclusion <- 'Error: the null hypothesis and sample mean must not be equal.'
conclusion2 <- conclusion
} else {
cleft <- par3 - csn2 * sqrt(par2) / sqrt(par1)
cright <- par3 + csn2 * sqrt(par2) / sqrt(par1)
c2 <- paste('[',cleft)
c2 <- paste(c2,', ')
c2 <- paste(c2,cright)
c2 <- paste(c2,']')
if ((par4 < cleft) | (par4 > cright))
{
conclusion2 <- 'Reject the null hypothesis'
} else {
conclusion2 <- 'Do not reject the null hypothesis'
}
}
if (par3 > par4)
{
c <- par4 + csn * sqrt(par2) / sqrt(par1)
if (par3 < c)
{
conclusion <- 'Do not reject the null hypothesis.'
} else {
conclusion <- 'Reject the null hypothesis.'
}
}
if (par3 < par4)
{
c <- par4 - csn * sqrt(par2) / sqrt(par1)
if (par3 > c)
{
conclusion <- 'Do not reject the null hypothesis.'
} else {
conclusion <- 'Reject the null hypothesis.'
}
}
c
conclusion
load(file='createtable')
a<-table.start()
a<-table.row.start(a)
a<-table.element(a,hyperlink('ht_mean_knownvar.htm','Testing Mean with known Variance','learn more about Statistical Hypothesis Testing about the Mean when the Variance is known'),2,TRUE)
a<-table.row.end(a)
a<-table.row.start(a)
a<-table.element(a,'sample size',header=TRUE)
a<-table.element(a,par1)
a<-table.row.end(a)
a<-table.row.start(a)
a<-table.element(a,'population variance',header=TRUE)
a<-table.element(a,par2)
a<-table.row.end(a)
a<-table.row.start(a)
a<-table.element(a,'sample mean',header=TRUE)
a<-table.element(a,par3)
a<-table.row.end(a)
a<-table.row.start(a)
a<-table.element(a,'null hypothesis about mean',header=TRUE)
a<-table.element(a,par4)
a<-table.row.end(a)
a<-table.row.start(a)
a<-table.element(a,'type I error',header=TRUE)
a<-table.element(a,par5)
a<-table.row.end(a)
a<-table.row.start(a)
a<-table.element(a,hyperlink('ht_mean_knownvar.htm#overview','critical value (one-tailed)','about the critical value'),header=TRUE)
a<-table.element(a,c)
a<-table.row.end(a)
a<-table.row.start(a)
a<-table.element(a,'confidence interval (two-tailed)
(sample mean)',header=TRUE)
a<-table.element(a,c2)
a<-table.row.end(a)
a<-table.row.start(a)
a<-table.element(a,'conclusion for one-tailed test',2,header=TRUE)
a<-table.row.end(a)
a<-table.row.start(a)
a<-table.element(a,conclusion,2)
a<-table.row.end(a)
a<-table.row.start(a)
a<-table.element(a,'conclusion for two-tailed test',2,header=TRUE)
a<-table.row.end(a)
a<-table.row.start(a)
a<-table.element(a,conclusion2,2)
a<-table.row.end(a)
a<-table.end(a)
table.save(a,file='mytable.tab')