On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:30:44 GMT, DZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Duncan Murdoch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> That doesn't make sense. Why would an infinite number of >> permutations give a "true" p-value? > >Consider Fisher's exact test and its permutational analogue - produced >by sampling tables with fixed margins at random. Fisher's p-value is a >"true" p-value of the exact test in the sense that it is obtained by >enumerating all relevant tables. As the number of permutations >increases, the MC p-value approaches Fisher's (true) p-value. > >The CI I'm talking about is about the precision of the permutation p >with respect to this "true" p. It does depend on p. "Sample size" here >is the number of permutations. Okay, I get what you were saying. Yes, that makes sense. Those CI's measure the uncertainty of your Monte Carlo method of estimating the p-value. I didn't get that from the original post. Duncan Murdoch . . ================================================================= Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at: . http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ . =================================================================
