Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Any non-linear differentiable function, (,), of two variables, and , can be expanded as + +. If we take the variance on both sides and use the formula [11] for the variance of a linear combination of variables (+) = + + (,), then we obtain | | + | | +, where is the standard deviation of the function , is the standard deviation of , is the standard deviation of and = is the ...
Help; Learn to edit; Community portal; Recent changes; Upload file; Special pages
For example, if the initial population of the assembly, N(0), is 1000, then the population at time , (), is 368. A very similar equation will be seen below, which arises when the base of the exponential is chosen to be 2, rather than e. In that case the scaling time is the "half-life".
Systematic errors are errors that are not determined by chance but are introduced by repeatable processes inherent to the system. [5] Sources of systematic errors include errors in equipment calibration, uncertainty in correction terms applied during experimental analysis, errors due the use of approximate theoretical models.
The delta method was derived from propagation of error, and the idea behind was known in the early 20th century. [1] Its statistical application can be traced as far back as 1928 by T. L. Kelley . [ 2 ]
It is remarkable that the sum of squares of the residuals and the sample mean can be shown to be independent of each other, using, e.g. Basu's theorem.That fact, and the normal and chi-squared distributions given above form the basis of calculations involving the t-statistic:
If the users know the amount of the systematic error, they may decide to adjust for it manually rather than having the instrument expensively adjusted to eliminate the error: e.g. in the above example they might manually reduce all the values read by about 4.8%.
For a Type I error, it is shown as α (alpha) and is known as the size of the test and is 1 minus the specificity of the test. This quantity is sometimes referred to as the confidence of the test, or the level of significance (LOS) of the test.