MW wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Jake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This year, circumstances dictated that the US Presidential race boiled
down to the results in Florida. That's where the decisive Electoral
Votes were and that's where the outcome was most uncertain. Since
then,
T.S. Lim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the software package Latent GOLD
http://www.statisticalinnovations.com/lg/highlights.htm
you can do regression (continuous or discrete response variable) using
mixture modeling. I'm interested in the statistical model behind the
method. Anyone
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Jake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Most of us feel that we know what "margin of error" means but to make
sure we're all on the same page, let's review.
Never assume a politician, or judge, or lawyer, or layman, or anyone
other than a statistician will properly
I've never heard of any statistician position requiring a psychological
test. Even when I worked at the RAND Corporation, where the position
involved some degree of defense-related research, it was not required.
(Frankly, if a firm required such a test, I would take that as a sign
that it is not
Question:
Let X_1,...,X_n be a random sample from the Uniform U[0,t] distribution,
i.e. with pdf:
f(x|t) = 1/t (0 x t).
Obtain the maximum likelihood estimator of t.
Now the model solution says:
Because it's a non-regular case, you can't differentiate it, so the
likelihood is:
L(t) =
Hi
On Tue, 26 Dec 2000, John Uebersax wrote:
IMHO, psychological tests in this case should not substitute for a
thorough interview and human judgment.
Just my .02 worth.
There is a considerable literature on clinical judgment (i.e.,
interview and human judgement) vs. actuarial predictions
On Sat, 23 Dec 2000 14:48:21 GMT, Gene Gallagher
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it would be unwise to use random sampling theory, with or
without the finite population correction, to infer what the percentage
of Bush and Gore votes would be among the non-machine counted votes.
There
- I have to disagree -
On Sat, 23 Dec 2000 03:22:56 -0800, Jake [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
This year, circumstances dictated that the US Presidential race boiled
down to the results in Florida. That's where the decisive Electoral
Votes were and that's where the outcome was most uncertain.
Rich Ulrich wrote:
I think it would be unwise to use random sampling theory, with or
without the finite population correction, to infer what the
percentage
of Bush and Gore votes would be among the non-machine counted votes.
There were several analyses published in the press about
Dear all,
Paired t-test allows us to exam whether the paired samples (or the same
samples) respond differently between two treatments. The null hypothesis
is H0: mu1=mu2 or mu1-mu2=0. Could this be extended to test a null
hypothesis with H0: mu1-mu2=C, where C is a constant, but unknown.
My
Yes, you can perform a paired t-test by hypothesizing a constant, C, in
H0: mu1 - mu2 = C, but whether or not C = 0 does not necessarily have
anything to do with distribution shape.
Jerrold H. Zar
Northern Illinois University
==
Wen-Feng Hsiao [EMAIL PROTECTED]
New and unusual virtual images, posted on datashaping,
at http://www.datashaping.com/artwork.shtml . Enjoy!
Vincent
=
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are
12 matches
Mail list logo
