Re: Maximum Likelihood Question

Herman Rubin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message 9vqoln$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:9vqoln$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Maximum likelihood is ASYMPTOTICALLY optimal in LARGE samples. It may not be good for small samples; it pays to look at how the actual likelihood function behaves. The fit is always

What does these mean in statistical sense??

I have 2 random variables (X and Y). The covariance,c was found equal to 20.2006 and their correlation coefficient,p was 0.0245. From the statistical book, if their c=0, means that X and Y are uncorrelated i.e p=0. However, in my case, c is quite large but p is extremely small...So, what

[±¤ °í] ¹«·áÀüÈ­¹øÈ£ µî·Ï, ¹«Á¦ÇÑ ÅëÈ­

Title: ÀÎÅÍ³Ý ¹«·á ÀüÈ­¹øÈ£ µî·Ï°ú ÃÖÀú°¡ ÀüÈ­±â ÆǸŠÀ̺¥Æ® ! ÀúÈñ Çï·Î¿ìÅÚÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ¿¹¾à°¡ÀÔÀ» ÇϽŠ°í°´´Ôµé¿¡°Ô °¨»çÀÇ ¸¶À½À» ÀüÇÏ°íÀÚÀÎÅͳݿë

Re: claculate L2 for Venus

Brad Guth wrote: My URL has much to do with the discovery of GUTH Venus http://geocities.com/bradguth One of my questions has to deal with a manned mission, which may need to utilize the orbit station L2, as an orbit situated so as to sustain life onboard the spacecraft for several

Re: What does these mean in statistical sense??

Chia C Chong wrote: I have 2 random variables (X and Y). The covariance,c was found equal to 20.2006 and their correlation coefficient,p was 0.0245. From the statistical book, if their c=0, means that X and Y are uncorrelated i.e p=0. However, in my case, c is quite large but p is

Re: What does these mean in statistical sense??

This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --D8246F46A01791942B12542B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit try doing a scattergram of your two variables. It should look much more like a cloud than a line. Anon. wrote: Chia C Chong wrote:

Re: What does these mean in statistical sense??

Thanks for all the helpful suggestions... Cheers, CCC Art Kendall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... try doing a scattergram of your two variables. It should look much more like a cloud than a line. Anon. wrote: Chia C Chong wrote: I

Re: Standardizing evaluation scores

A classic problem of 'norming' or 'standardizing' the scale and the preceptors. Can you find a couple students who fall near the bottom and tops of the scale? Preferably ones whose final rankings are not 'permanent record'? then you would have each preceptor use these two students as

[±¤°í] °¡Àå Àç¹ÌÀÖ°Ô ¿µÈ­¸¦ º¸´Â ¹æ¹ý

Title: + SATÄ·ÆÛ½º + CCFE + Ưº° À̺¥Æ® SATÄ·ÆÛ½º | ½ÃÇèÁ¤º¸ | ¾ÆÄ«µ¥¹Ì | À¯ÇÐÁ¤º¸ | Ä¿¹Â´ÏƼ | À¥¸ÞÀÏ | ¿Â¶óÀΰ­ÀÇ

hey hey

Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) on Friday, December 21, 2001 at 04:05:07 --- message:Hi, my name is Heather and I am a 19 year old female from San Diego, California.

Re: chi square validity?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Benjamin Kenward) wrote in message news:9vnj9m$s2c$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Hi folks, Let's say you have a repeatable experiment and each time the result can be classed into a number of discrete categories (in this real case, seven). If a treatment has no effect, it is known