rate of source calculation
There is a source which produces M code words x1, x2xm. Each code word is a sequence of N channel inputs. How do you find the rate of this source? Is it (ln M)/N or something else? How? = Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =
Why does the height of empirical distribution density does not match theoretical PDF??
I tried to fit the empirical distribution of a set of data to some theoretical distributions (Say is gamma PDF). When I plotted the probability density of the empirical data and the estimated gamma PDF, it seems that the front tail (the side with ramping up!!) and the back tail (side with ramping down!!) fit very accurately to the data. The only bit that is not fit is the height of the estimated gamma PDF is not high enough. Does this means that this set of data does not fit this PDF at all or there are some other implication of this observation?? Thanks,, CCC = Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =
Re: Proportionate vs. disproportionate
EugeneGall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: : The Gallup organization posted a video to explain why the the increase in : black's job approval for Bush is 'proportionate' to the increase among whites. It makes no sense to talk of "proportionate" increases in percentages Suppose you start at zero or 99% ... = Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =
Subscribe confirmation
Hello , PLEASE CLICK HERE TO CONFIRM YOUR SUBSCRIPTION http://www.getfreebonus.com/subscribeme.asp?[EMAIL PROTECTED]&confkey=z4657165 -- You must click the above link to begin receiving your newsletters! -- Thank You For Choosing GetFreeBonus.com ! Here are just a few of the great features that you may look forward to: - MP3 music. - On-line casino, bonus deposit and jackpot. - Gifts and discounts. - Direct Links to many adult sites on the Internet- we'll keep you informed. - NEW PICTURES delivered daily to your email address. - Exclusive Hot Teen pictures. - Hot & Steamy EROTIC STORIES - a new one every day! - Free Passwords - Free access to the hottest adult sites. - Extensive Archives - all past pictures and more... - We have more than 1,000,000 Happy Subscribers and more than 1,000 new offers every day. Number of our subscribers is growing by the thousands every day! Find out why so many users agree that this is the BEST BONUS NEWSLETTER SITE ON THE WEB ! You must be at least 18 years old to use this FREE service. Do not proceed if you are under 18 years old. ** PLEASE CONFIRM YOUR SUBSCRIPTION NOW ** If you have not done so yet, please confirm your subscription by clicking below: http://www.getfreebonus.com/subscribeme.asp?[EMAIL PROTECTED]&confkey=z4657165 -- Please note that this is the ONLY way to start your subscription -- = Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =
Re: Proportionate vs. disproportionate
His definition of proportionate would mean that if a group's approval of Bush went from 1% to 31%, that too would be proportionate. The relative odds would be one way of expressing the changes in proportions, but the absolute difference (60% to 90% is roughly propotionate to an increase from 33% to 68%) seems quite wrong. = Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =
Re: Proportionate vs. disproportionate
there are two sets of data ... one for georgeDUBU ... and the elder george bush here is what i glean from the charts for george w ... the EVENT was sept 11 ... for the elder george bush ... the EVENT was the gulf war ... and both were before and after ratings 1. whites approval rating for BOTH ... was much higher than blacks 2. both whites and blacks jumped rather dramatically (in the 30 percent range) on AFTER compared to BEFORE 3. to me, proportionate would be "both increasing" the same approximate % ... disproportionate would imply large differentials in % changes ... in neither case were the % jumps the same ... for each bush ... before and after ... comparing whites and blacks (assuming the data reported in the video is correct) ... so TECHNICALLY ... it is disproportionate ... but ... what about "approximately" ??? i think it is a matter of practical differences and semantics ... not really statistically significant differences ... given the ns ... it is possible that the difference in THE differences MIGHT have been significant ... here are the values george w ... WHITES pre post change 60 9030 BLACKS 33 6835 elder george WHITES 64 9026 BLACKS 33 7037 difference between w/b for geore w = 31 versus 35 difference between w/b for elder george = 26 versus 37 now, i would be willing to say that there is less difference in change for george w than the elder george ... in viewing the video ... i did not see that the person really said anything categorical about this ... he used the term "roughly" ... just depends if the VIEWER of the video and data wants to think that 4% verus 11% means "roughly" the same change ... or not thus, i don't think the moderator said anything really wrong ... At 04:27 PM 1/10/02 +, EugeneGall wrote: >The Gallup organization posted a video to explain why the the increase in >black's job approval for Bush is 'proportionate' to the increase among >whites. >Both increased by about 30% (60 to 90 for whites, mid thirties to roughly 70% >for blacks), so the increase is proportionate, not disproportionate, since >both >increases were about 30%. Unless I'm missing something, and I don't think I >am, this proportionate - disproportionate error is repeated and emphasized >several times in the video. > >http://www.gallup.com/poll/Multimedia/video/archived/2002/01/vr020108b.ram > >Gene Gallagher >UMASS/Boston > > >= >Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the >problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at > http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ >= _ dennis roberts, educational psychology, penn state university 208 cedar, AC 8148632401, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://roberts.ed.psu.edu/users/droberts/drober~1.htm = Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =
Proportionate vs. disproportionate
The Gallup organization posted a video to explain why the the increase in black's job approval for Bush is 'proportionate' to the increase among whites. Both increased by about 30% (60 to 90 for whites, mid thirties to roughly 70% for blacks), so the increase is proportionate, not disproportionate, since both increases were about 30%. Unless I'm missing something, and I don't think I am, this proportionate - disproportionate error is repeated and emphasized several times in the video. http://www.gallup.com/poll/Multimedia/video/archived/2002/01/vr020108b.ram Gene Gallagher UMASS/Boston = Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =
Re: what is the appropriate method?
On Thu, 10 Jan 2002 12:00:06 +0100, "Jos Jansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Rich Ulrich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > On Wed, 09 Jan 2002 08:33:41 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > (Jukka Sinisalo) wrote: > > > > > > > > We have two pots with 25 plants each. After an identical treatment we > > > wait for a week, and then calculate how many of the plants died. We > > > repeat this "experiment" 20 times, so we end up with 20 pairs of > > > "survival percantages". > > > > > > We are interested in determining the accuracy/reliability of our > > > method. In other words if in the future we use just one pot of 25 > > > plants, what will be the confidence interval of the result. > > snip > > > "transform the data" - is easy and apt. > > > > Compute the logit and use that in your modeling. With > > the difference of two of them, you have the "log Odds Ratio." > > snip > > Using logits is obvious, but log Odds Ratio is not, given the aim to use > only one pot in the future (not the difference of two). An estimate of the > sum of variance components within and between repeats will be required for > calculating the precision of a single result. > Oh, right. Thanks. I was reading the problem as something different. Misreading it. -- Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html = Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =
Re: Standardizing evaluation scores
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dennis Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >sorry for late reply >ranking is the LEAST useful thing you can do ... so, i would never START >with simple ranks >any sort of an absolute kind of scale ... imperfect as it is ... would >generally be better ... You can say that again! >one can always convert more detailed scale values INTO ranks at the end if >necessary BUT, you cannot go the reverse route This cannot be overemphasized. We see much of this; how valid are those of the current IQ scales, where the values are given by converting the raw scores to a normal distribution? This is also done in other tests of this type; we need to teach in our beginning courses not to transform unless one has a REALLY good reason to do so, and obtaining normality is not one. -- This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University. Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558 = Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =
A NEW Electronic BOOK on STATISTICS!
A NEW Electronic BOOK on STATISTICS! Dear Colleagues, We are sending you the following announcement of a new book publication of Prof. Dr. Victor Aladjev and believe you could be interested in this subject matter. If you or your colleagues are not interested in this publication, simply delete this E-mail. Apologies if you receive this notice more than once. We thank you for your attention! We are introducing the following book on the General Statistics: INTERACTIVE COURSE OF THE GENERAL THEORY OF STATISTICS by Prof. Dr. Victor Zacharias ALADJEV published by BB IAN Press: Tallinn, 2001, ISBN 9985-60-866-6 Interactive Course of General Theory of Statistics is a HTML-based course for undergraduate students in all fields of social, legal, biomedical and economic sciences. The book will introduce the basic concepts and methods of statistical data processing and their further development in various ways. With the help of these concepts and methods, a variety of applications will be examined, concentrating an attention on statistical data processing by computer. This book will enable the reader to acquire necessary statistical knowledge and elementary experience in statistical data processing by computers. This book will be of particular interest to statistics educators and specialists who are involved in the teaching of statistics at all levels, as well as to researchers in statistics education. More detailed information on the contents of the book and terms of its acquisition is available in the attached site: http://www.geocities.com/intl_academy_noosphere/Order.htm To obtain more specific information on this book please contact: Baltic Branch of the International Academy of Noosphere Order Department: Raadiku 13-75, Tallinn, 13817 ESTONIA Phone: +(372) 63 56 078; Fax: +1 707 276 0713 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] = Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =
Re: what is the appropriate method?
"Rich Ulrich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > On Wed, 09 Jan 2002 08:33:41 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > (Jukka Sinisalo) wrote: > > > > > We have two pots with 25 plants each. After an identical treatment we > > wait for a week, and then calculate how many of the plants died. We > > repeat this "experiment" 20 times, so we end up with 20 pairs of > > "survival percantages". > > > > We are interested in determining the accuracy/reliability of our > > method. In other words if in the future we use just one pot of 25 > > plants, what will be the confidence interval of the result. snip > "transform the data" - is easy and apt. > > Compute the logit and use that in your modeling. With > the difference of two of them, you have the "log Odds Ratio." snip Using logits is obvious, but log Odds Ratio is not, given the aim to use only one pot in the future (not the difference of two). An estimate of the sum of variance components within and between repeats will be required for calculating the precision of a single result. Jos Jansen = Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ =
