1.73k likes | 1.9k Views
Last Time. Hypothesis Testing Yes – No Questions Assess with p-value P[what saw or m.c. | Boundary] Interpretation Small is conclusive 1-sided vs. 2-sided. Administrative Matters. Midterm I, coming Tuesday, Feb. 24. Administrative Matters. Midterm I, coming Tuesday, Feb. 24
E N D
Last Time • Hypothesis Testing • Yes – No Questions • Assess with p-value P[what saw or m.c. | Boundary] • Interpretation • Small is conclusive • 1-sided vs. 2-sided
Administrative Matters Midterm I, coming Tuesday, Feb. 24
Administrative Matters Midterm I, coming Tuesday, Feb. 24 • Numerical answers: • No computers, no calculators • Handwrite Excel formulas (e.g. =9+4^2) • Don’t do arithmetic (e.g. use such formulas)
Administrative Matters Midterm I, coming Tuesday, Feb. 24 • Numerical answers: • No computers, no calculators • Handwrite Excel formulas (e.g. =9+4^2) • Don’t do arithmetic (e.g. use such formulas) • Bring with you: • 8.5 x 11 inch sheet of paper • With your favorite info (formulas, Excel, etc.)
Administrative Matters Midterm I, coming Tuesday, Feb. 24 • Numerical answers: • No computers, no calculators • Handwrite Excel formulas (e.g. =9+4^2) • Don’t do arithmetic (e.g. use such formulas) • Bring with you: • 8.5 x 11 inch sheet of paper • With your favorite info (formulas, Excel, etc.) • Course in Concepts, not Memorization
Administrative Matters State of BlackBoard Discussion Board • Generally happy with result
Administrative Matters State of BlackBoard Discussion Board • Generally happy with result • But think carefully about “where to post” • Look at current Thread HW 4 • Note “diffusion of questions” • Hard to find what you want
Administrative Matters State of BlackBoard Discussion Board • Generally happy with result • But think carefully about “where to post” • Look at current Thread HW 4 • Note “diffusion of questions” • Hard to find what you want • Suggest keep HW problems all together • i.e. One “Root node” per HW problem
Administrative Matters State of BlackBoard Discussion Board • Suggest keep HW problems all together • i.e. One “Root node” per HW problem
Administrative Matters State of BlackBoard Discussion Board • Suggest keep HW problems all together • i.e. One “Root node” per HW problem • Choose where to post (in tree) carefully
Administrative Matters State of BlackBoard Discussion Board • Suggest keep HW problems all together • i.e. One “Root node” per HW problem • Choose where to post (in tree) carefully • Use better “Subject Lines” • Not just dumb “Replies” • You can enter anything you want • Try to make it clear to readers… • Especially when “not following current line”
Reading In Textbook Approximate Reading for Today’s Material: Pages 261-262, 9-14 Approximate Reading for Next Class: 270-276, 30-34
Hypothesis Testing In General: p-value = P[what was seen, or more conclusive | at boundary between H0 & H1] Caution: more conclusive requires careful interpretation
Hypothesis Testing Caution: more conclusive requires careful interpretation Reason: Need to decide between 1 - sided Hypotheses, like H0 : p < vs. H1: p ≥ And 2 - sided Hypotheses, like H0 : p = vs. H1: p ≠
Hypothesis Testing e.g. a slot machine bears a sign which says “Win 30% of the time” In 10 plays, I don’t win any. Can I conclude sign is false? (& thus have grounds for complaint, or is this a reasonable occurrence?)
Hypothesis Testing e.g. a slot machine bears a sign which says “Win 30% of the time” In 10 plays, I don’t win any. Conclude false? Let p = P[win], let X = # wins in 10 plays Model: X ~ Bi(10, p) Test: H0: p = 0.3 vs. H1: p ≠ 0.3
Hypothesis Testing Test: H0: p = 0.3 vs. H1: p ≠ 0.3 p-value = P[X = 0 or more conclusive | p = 0.3]
Hypothesis Testing Test: H0: p = 0.3 vs. H1: p ≠ 0.3 p-value = P[X = 0 or more conclusive | p = 0.3] (understand this by visualizing # line)
Hypothesis Testing Test: H0: p = 0.3 vs. H1: p ≠ 0.3 p-value = P[X = 0 or more conclusive | p = 0.3] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Hypothesis Testing Test: H0: p = 0.3 vs. H1: p ≠ 0.3 p-value = P[X = 0 or more conclusive | p = 0.3] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 30% of 10, most likely when p = 0.3 i.e. least conclusive
Hypothesis Testing Test: H0: p = 0.3 vs. H1: p ≠ 0.3 p-value = P[X = 0 or more conclusive | p = 0.3] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 so more conclusive includes
Hypothesis Testing Test: H0: p = 0.3 vs. H1: p ≠ 0.3 p-value = P[X = 0 or more conclusive | p = 0.3] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 so more conclusive includes but since 2-sided, also include
Hypothesis Testing Generally how to calculate? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Hypothesis Testing Generally how to calculate? Observed Value 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Hypothesis Testing Generally how to calculate? Observed Value Most Likely Value 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Hypothesis Testing Generally how to calculate? Observed Value Most Likely Value 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 # spaces = 3
Hypothesis Testing Generally how to calculate? Observed Value Most Likely Value 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 # spaces = 3 so go 3 spaces in other direct’n
Hypothesis Testing Result: More conclusive means X ≤ 0 or X ≥ 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Hypothesis Testing Result: More conclusive means X ≤ 0 or X ≥ 6 p-value = P[X = 0 or more conclusive | p = 0.3]
Hypothesis Testing Result: More conclusive means X ≤ 0 or X ≥ 6 p-value = P[X = 0 or more conclusive | p = 0.3] = P[X ≤ 0 or X ≥ 6 | p = 0.3]
Hypothesis Testing Result: More conclusive means X ≤ 0 or X ≥ 6 p-value = P[X = 0 or more conclusive | p = 0.3] = P[X ≤ 0 or X ≥ 6 | p = 0.3] = P[X ≤ 0] + (1 – P[X ≤ 5])
Hypothesis Testing Result: More conclusive means X ≤ 0 or X ≥ 6 p-value = P[X = 0 or more conclusive | p = 0.3] = P[X ≤ 0 or X ≥ 6 | p = 0.3] = P[X ≤ 0] + (1 – P[X ≤ 5]) = 0.076
Hypothesis Testing Result: More conclusive means X ≤ 0 or X ≥ 6 p-value = P[X = 0 or more conclusive | p = 0.3] = P[X ≤ 0 or X ≥ 6 | p = 0.3] = P[X ≤ 0] + (1 – P[X ≤ 5]) = 0.076 Excel result from: http://www.stat-or.unc.edu/webspace/courses/marron/UNCstor155-2009/ClassNotes/Stor155Eg4.xls
Hypothesis Testing Test: H0: p = 0.3 vs. H1: p ≠ 0.3 p-value = 0.076
Hypothesis Testing Test: H0: p = 0.3 vs. H1: p ≠ 0.3 p-value = 0.076 Yes-No Conclusion: 0.076 > 0.05, so not safe to conclude “P[win] = 0.3” sign is wrong, at level 0.05
Hypothesis Testing Test: H0: p = 0.3 vs. H1: p ≠ 0.3 p-value = 0.076 Yes-No Conclusion: 0.076 > 0.05, so not safe to conclude “P[win] = 0.3” sign is wrong, at level 0.05 (10 straight losses is reasonably likely)
Hypothesis Testing Test: H0: p = 0.3 vs. H1: p ≠ 0.3 p-value = 0.076 Yes-No Conclusion: 0.076 > 0.05, so not safe to conclude “P[win] = 0.3” sign is wrong, at level 0.05 Gray Level Conclusion: in “fuzzy zone”, some evidence, but not too strong
Hypothesis Testing Alternate Question: Same setup, can we conclude: P[win] < 30% ???
Hypothesis Testing Alternate Question: Same setup, can we conclude: P[win] < 30% ??? • Seems like same question?
Hypothesis Testing Alternate Question: Same setup, can we conclude: P[win] < 30% ??? • Seems like same question? • Careful, “≠” became “<”
Hypothesis Testing Alternate Question: Same setup, can we conclude: P[win] < 30% ??? • Seems like same question? • Careful, “≠” became “<” • I.e. 2-sided hypo became 1-sided hypo
Hypothesis Testing Alternate Question: Same setup, can we conclude: P[win] < 30% ??? • Seems like same question? • Careful, “≠” became “<” • I.e. 2-sided hypo became 1-sided hypo • Difference can have major impact
Hypothesis Testing Alternate Question: Same setup, can we conclude: P[win] < 30% ???
Hypothesis Testing Alternate Question: Same setup, can we conclude: P[win] < 30% ??? Test: H0: p ≥ 0.3 vs. H1: p < 0.3
Hypothesis Testing Alternate Question: Same setup, can we conclude: P[win] < 30% ??? Test: H0: p ≥ 0.3 vs. H1: p < 0.3 p-value = P[ X = 0 or m. c. | p = 0.3]
Hypothesis Testing Alternate Question: Same setup, can we conclude: P[win] < 30% ??? Test: H0: p ≥ 0.3 vs. H1: p < 0.3 p-value = P[ X = 0 or m. c. | p = 0.3] same boundary between H0 & H1
Hypothesis Testing Alternate Question: Same setup, can we conclude: P[win] < 30% ??? Test: H0: p ≥ 0.3 vs. H1: p < 0.3 p-value = P[ X = 0 or m. c. | p = 0.3]
Hypothesis Testing Alternate Question: Same setup, can we conclude: P[win] < 30% ??? Test: H0: p ≥ 0.3 vs. H1: p < 0.3 p-value = P[ X = 0 or m. c. | p = 0.3] = P[ X ≤ 0 | p = 0.3]
Hypothesis Testing Alternate Question: Same setup, can we conclude: P[win] < 30% ??? Test: H0: p ≥ 0.3 vs. H1: p < 0.3 p-value = P[ X = 0 or m. c. | p = 0.3] = P[ X ≤ 0 | p = 0.3] = 0.028
Hypothesis Testing Alternate Question: Same setup, can we conclude: P[win] < 30% ??? Test: H0: p ≥ 0.3 vs. H1: p < 0.3 p-value = P[ X = 0 or m. c. | p = 0.3] = P[ X ≤ 0 | p = 0.3] = 0.028 Excel result from: http://www.stat-or.unc.edu/webspace/courses/marron/UNCstor155-2009/ClassNotes/Stor155Eg4.xls