There's no algorithm that will identify the outliers in this example [dropbox.com].
So there's no algorithm for comparing observed values to modeled (predicted) values? The absolute value of the difference between the two can't be calculated? Hmm. . .
What value of correlation coefficient distinguishes pattern data from random data in this image [wikimedia.org]?
Are the data in that image random? Also, the data without the four points at the bottom would have a higher correlation coefficient.
Outliers are often so extreme and rare that despite being statistically unbiased, they nevertheless severely skew statistics which aren't robust to them.
If outliers are unbiased, they can affect the results, but how can they skew the results? Also, if they're rare, how much effect can they have?
A set of random data with a significant correlation coefficient is indistinguishable from a genuine correlation.
Not on a scatterplot. It's pretty clear how close the data are to the line. Also, how probable is it that random data would have s statistically significant correlation coefficient?
1) Outliers will skew the values, and there is no computable way to detect or deal with outliers (source [wikipedia.org])
Do outliers skew the results? If the outliers are biased, then that may tell us something about the underlying population. If they aren't biased, then their effects cancel.
4) There is no way to measure the predictive value of the results. Linear regression will always return the best line to fit the data, even when the data is random.
But random data would generate statistically insignificant correlation coefficients. Also, the 95% confidence intervals used to predict values are wider for random data.
Maybe none of them is normally distributed, but if we take distributions of sample means of 50 berries, then those distributions might all be close to the normal distribution.
But the tests are supposed to measure how well teachers/schools perform, not how well parents perform. Whether the tests do that is a different question.
While I've had such problems with proprietary software for Linux (except that I can't even buy it), I've had few such problems with open-source software.
What do rational numbers have to do with infinitesimals? And I should have said that we might specify the rational numbers in terms of the natural numbers.
While Leibniz used infinitesimals, Newton used nascent and evanescent quantities, which may have been one-sided limits.
we can construct rigourously the set of integer numbers, and set of rational numbers, as well as the set of real numbers and complex numbers.
Perhaps we specify the rationals in terms of the rational numbers. Also, if we are now constructing the rational numbers, does that mean they didn't exist in Newton's time? Or if they did exist then, how do we construct them now?
Slashdot Mirror
There's no algorithm that will identify the outliers in this example [dropbox.com].
So there's no algorithm for comparing observed values to modeled (predicted) values? The absolute value of the difference between the two can't be calculated? Hmm. . .
What value of correlation coefficient distinguishes pattern data from random data in this image [wikimedia.org]?
Are the data in that image random? Also, the data without the four points at the bottom would have a higher correlation coefficient.
Outliers are often so extreme and rare that despite being statistically unbiased, they nevertheless severely skew statistics which aren't robust to them.
If outliers are unbiased, they can affect the results, but how can they skew the results? Also, if they're rare, how much effect can they have?
A set of random data with a significant correlation coefficient is indistinguishable from a genuine correlation.
Not on a scatterplot. It's pretty clear how close the data are to the line. Also, how probable is it that random data would have s statistically significant correlation coefficient?
1) Outliers will skew the values, and there is no computable way to detect or deal with outliers (source [wikipedia.org])
Do outliers skew the results? If the outliers are biased, then that may tell us something about the underlying population. If they aren't biased, then their effects cancel.
4) There is no way to measure the predictive value of the results. Linear regression will always return the best line to fit the data, even when the data is random.
But random data would generate statistically insignificant correlation coefficients. Also, the 95% confidence intervals used to predict values are wider for random data.
Ahhh!! it's 1/20, not two percent. Of course, it's 5%.
It's not an assertion, it's basic math--0.05 is 20%
.
0.05 is 2%, not 20%
Maybe none of them is normally distributed, but if we take distributions of sample means of 50 berries, then those distributions might all be close to the normal distribution.
http://xkcd.com/435/
But the contraction for "would not" is "wouldn't".
Good question, but still I doubt they're testing how well the parents do.
But the tests are supposed to measure how well teachers/schools perform, not how well parents perform. Whether the tests do that is a different question.
While I've had such problems with proprietary software for Linux (except that I can't even buy it), I've had few such problems with open-source software.
Libreoffice can produce doc output.
He discusses why the file formats are the way they are, but I'm not sure he says they suck.
What do rational numbers have to do with infinitesimals? And I should have said that we might specify the rational numbers in terms of the natural numbers.
While Leibniz used infinitesimals, Newton used nascent and evanescent quantities, which may have been one-sided limits.
Perhaps GP meant to increase the radius by 50% while leaving the central angle the same.
If you have ten pennies and you eat half,
Eating pennies? Shouldn't schools be discouraging that?
That article doesn't even mention slices. Also, we can use stackable slices and have the students put one on top of the other.
we can construct rigourously the set of integer numbers, and set of rational numbers, as well as the set of real numbers and complex numbers.
Perhaps we specify the rationals in terms of the rational numbers. Also, if we are now constructing the rational numbers, does that mean they didn't exist in Newton's time? Or if they did exist then, how do we construct them now?
gave students the notion of how you construct and use mathematical objects.
Do we construct mathematical objects? Did the number one not exist until I became aware of it?
Light travels at 300 km per second. According to http://www.distance-cities.com/distance-chicago-il-to-washington-dc, the staright-line distance between Washington DC and Chicago is 957 km. Assuming the signal doesn't go through the earth, that's still over 3 ms.
But are any truths discoverable by religion?
Are you implying that Ballmer failed his way?
IBM doesn't sell to individual consumers, and Apple doesn't make me yawn.
Before XP, Win 98 was three years old, and Win XP wasn't six years old until 2007. Hardly early 2000s.
Actually, "cite" is the proper word.