Rich Ulrich wrote:
> - In my vocabulary, these days, "nonparametric" starts out with data
> being ranked, or otherwise being placed into categories -- it is the
> infinite parameters involved in that sort of non-reversible re-scoring
> which earns the label, nonparametric. (I am still trying to
Frank E Harrell Jr wrote:
>
> > > Alex Yu wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Disadvantages of non-parametric tests:
> > > >
> > > > Losing precision: Edgington (1995) asserted that when more precise
> > > > measurements are available, it is unwise to degrade the precision by
> > > > transforming the measurem
Robert Dawson wrote:
[a long description of an instransitivity problem with WMW]
This is very interesting!
I'm interested to know what happens in these cases with
Kruskal-Wallis - presumably it will reject.
It does make the point (which I always try to make clear
to people) that unless you ha
Parametric/Nonparametric bootstrap is standard terminology, used in
the books by Efrom/Tibshirani, Davison/Hinkley, Chernick, Shao/Tu,
and so on. It's not new, it's by now 20 years old. The
parametric bootstrap is already in Efron, 1979, it's equally
traditional as the nonparametric
one. Both
At 12:04 PM 12/8/99 -0500, Rich Ulrich wrote:
-- snip --
>Similarly, bootstrapping is a method of "robust variance estimation"
>but it does not change the metric like a power transformation does, or
>abandon the metric like a rank-order transformation does. If it were
>proper terminology to sa
Donald,
I'm a firm believer in the effects of Maxwell's Demon.
Mike
- Original Message -
From: Donald F. Burrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Mike Wogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Luv 2 muah 143 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 12:41 PM
Subject: Re: could someone help me with this intro to stat. problem
| On Wed, 8 Dec
> > Alex Yu wrote:
> > >
> > > Disadvantages of non-parametric tests:
> > >
> > > Losing precision: Edgington (1995) asserted that when more precise
> > > measurements are available, it is unwise to degrade the precision by
> > > transforming the measurements into ranked data.
Edgington's comment
Mike,
With randomization pre, it is not necessary to take a pre-intervention
measurement. Test the difference in confidence following the training. If
it is significant, there is a difference. Decide what direction it is in
and attribute the difference to the training. You can make this attribu
>On 8 Dec 1999, Luv 2 muah 143 wrote:
>
>> 5 of 10 volunteers are randomly selected to receive self-defense training.
>> The other 5 receive no training. At the end of the training period, all
>> subjects complete a self-confidence questionnaire.
>>
>> a.) Is there a difference in self-con
Mark ( [EMAIL PROTECTED]) write:
> I have a problem that puzzles me. It's a theorem that is listed in an
> inference book. Here it is:
>
> If a random sample with size two is taken from a distribution with
> positive variance and if the sum and the difference of the two
> components of that sam
Hi, GM --
We always have trouble trying to give "names" to things. Usually
we increase misunderstanding as we give ambiguous names to things.
For example, how many folks know what is meant when they hear
someone say "In a 3-factor ANOVA (A,B,C) there is a "significant
'A' MAIN EFFECT." The "som
I suspect most readers (including myself) would prefer the more simple and clear terms
"explained variance" and "unexplained variance." I suggest leaving the term
alienation to Karl Marx's Political-Economy.
Burke Johnson
Mike Wogan writes --
- Original Message -
From: Mike Wogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Luv 2 muah 143 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 11:16 AM
Subject: Re: could someone help me with this intro to stat. problem
| On 8 Dec 1999, Luv 2
On Wed, 8 Dec 1999, Mike Wogan wrote, in response to Luv 2 muah 143's
question:
> > 5 of 10 volunteers are randomly selected to receive self-defense
> > training. The other 5 receive no training. At the end of the
> > training period, all subjects complete a self-confidence
> > questionnair
I believe I've heard (1-r^2) called the "coefficient of alienation," but I
can't think of any references...
Gaurang Mehta wrote:
> I am looking for the coefficient name for (1-r^2). I know r^2 is the
> Coefficient of Determination, but I do not know the name of the (1-r^2)
> coefficient.
>
> An
Sample coefficient of alienation
"Gaurang Mehta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
82m788$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:82m788$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I am looking for the coefficient name for (1-r^2). I know r^2 is
the
> Coefficient of Determination, but I do not know the name of the
(1-r^2)
> coef
On 8 Dec 1999, Luv 2 muah 143 wrote:
> 5 of 10 volunteers are randomly selected to receive self-defense training. The
> other 5 receive no training. At the end of the training period, all subjects
> complete a self-confidence questionnaire.
>
> a.) Is there a difference in self-confidence b
I am looking for the coefficient name for (1-r^2). I know r^2 is the
Coefficient of Determination, but I do not know the name of the (1-r^2)
coefficient.
Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance
GM
- I have a comment on an offhand remark of Glen's, at the start of
his interesting posting -
On Tue, 07 Dec 1999 15:58:11 +1100, Glen Barnett
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alex Yu wrote:
> >
> > Disadvantages of non-parametric tests:
> >
> > Losing precision: Edgington (1995) asserted that whe
5 of 10 volunteers are randomly selected to receive self-defense training. The
other 5 receive no training. At the end of the training period, all subjects
complete a self-confidence questionnaire.
a.) Is there a difference in self-confidence between the 2 groups (p<.01)?
b.) What are the
I think you can try XploRe
please visit http://www.xplore-stat.de
thank,
Hizir
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" schrieb:
> Could anyone tell me how to
> perform GARCH analysis on
> time series data? What software
> do I need to perform this type of
> analysis? Any help would be
> greatly appreciated.
>
>
22 matches
Mail list logo
