Herman Rubin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dave J. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Could anyone recommend a good starting point for learning more about mixture
>> models? I've had several stats classes, none of which has addressed this
>> topic, and I need to start somewhere. Thanks.
>
> A mixture
In article <9adcnm$l9s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jason Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hello -- I need to know if such a theorem exists.
>Suppose I have a sequence of RVs: X1, X2, ...
>each with mean mu and finite second momment.
>Now, I know that I have asymptotic normality of
>the standardized samp
David and others,
Some comments follow which I hope will be of some interest.
On 28 Mar 2001 15:52:49 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David C. Howell)
wrote:
>
>Dennis,
>
>The closest answer that I can find as an answer to your question is that "it is
>very complicated."
The exact distribution und
Things are not always what they seem.
Consider the following data:
A B A/BLog A Log B Log A - Log
3 13.4770.477
1 3.333 0 .477 -.477
2 2 1.301
Hello -- I need to know if such a theorem exists.
Suppose I have a sequence of RVs: X1, X2, ...
each with mean mu and finite second momment.
Now, I know that I have asymptotic normality of
the standardized sample mean if the RVs are independent.
The rate of the convergence is SQRT(n).
What I wa
Doing that one-sample t-test on the ratio is not a bad idea.
But it is not a new idea, either. It is, precisely, 100% identical to
doing a repeated measures test on the logarithm of the raw numbers.
Which is the same as the paired t-test.
On 2 Apr 2001 11:53:11 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dr
Gr
At 01:55 PM 4/3/01 -0500, Drake R. Bradley wrote:
>While I agree with the sentiments expressed by others that attachments should
>not be sent to email lists, I take exception that this should apply to small
>(only a few KB or so) gif or jpeg images. Pictures *are* often worth a
>thousand words, a
At 10:19 AM -0500 3/4/01, jim clark on edstat-l wrote:
>By default in SPSS, the error term used to test the significance
>of each contrast is specific to the particular contrast. So with
>a two-group comparison, it amounts to a paired-difference t-test...
>Whether other packages adopt the same ap
dennis roberts wrote:
> the pragmatic of the situation is:
>
> DO NOT SEND ANY ATTACHMENTS TO ANY LIST
>
> this has PARTLY to do with virus spreading potential but ... partly to
> courtesy ... and partly due to the fact that when downloading your messages
> say at home ... on a modem ... you can'
Attn: Sales Manager
If you are outsourcing or need to expand your sales force for the short term or long
term contract, TeleXpand
will create a tailored campaign to guarantee you and your product success.
We are an established, full service call center with a completely trained staff of 70
Hey,
I just joined a FREE site, TargetShop.com, that lets you earn $10,000 just
for referring your friends!
Go to TargetShop.com
http://www.shopping4points.com/default.asp?REFID=2167125 and register for
Membership using my Referral Number 2167125. If you sign up, before May 1st,
I will be eligib
Hi
On 2 Apr 2001, Will Hopkins wrote:
> in the within-subject error between levels of the factor. Fine, but
> then you want to do a specific contrast between levels of the
> within-subject factor, such as the last pre-treatment vs the first
> post-treatment (with or without a control group--i
I have upload new version of WiSCy99 v.4.25 to ZDNet:
http://www.zdnet.com/downloads/stories/info/0,,000PUQ,.html
WiSCy99 (Windows Scientific Calculator + Grapher + Unit Converter) is a
comprehensive yet easy-to-use scientific calculator. Very thorough and
nicely designed, WiSCy is well document
The first new Census data in 10 years is now available. During March
2001 the U.S. Census Bureau is releasing State files daily, for
Population, Race
and Age, down to the Block. The raw data is free from the Census Bureau
at:
http://ftp2.census.gov/census_2000/datasets/redistricting_file--pl_94-
dennis roberts wrote:
>
> the pragmatic of the situation is:
>
> DO NOT SEND ANY ATTACHMENTS TO ANY LIST
More accurately - do not send any attachments to any list that does not
have a specific policy or tradition permitting this.
But, by the same token, a 10K attachment is no
the pragmatic of the situation is:
DO NOT SEND ANY ATTACHMENTS TO ANY LIST
this has PARTLY to do with virus spreading potential but ... partly to
courtesy ... and partly due to the fact that when downloading your messages
say at home ... on a modem ... you can't get to the NEXT message witho
Bob Hayden wrote:
>
> I checked with a nerdy geek and was told that it is a waste of
> bandwidth to broadcast attachments to an entire mailing list.
This to some extend depends on the size of the attachment;
but the principle is sound UNLESS the list is a specialized one of
a nature th
17 matches
Mail list logo
