/*! This file is auto-generated */ .wp-block-button__link{color:#fff;background-color:#32373c;border-radius:9999px;box-shadow:none;text-decoration:none;padding:calc(.667em + 2px) calc(1.333em + 2px);font-size:1.125em}.wp-block-file__button{background:#32373c;color:#fff;text-decoration:none} Q11-22BSC Benford鈥檚 Law. According to Be... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91影视

91影视

Benford鈥檚 Law. According to Benford鈥檚 law, a variety of different data sets include numbers with leading (first) digits that follow the distribution shown in the table below. In Exercises 21鈥24, test for goodness-of-fit with the distribution described by Benford鈥檚 law.

Leading Digits

Benford's Law: Distributuon of leading digits

1

30.10%

2

17.60%

3

12.50%

4

9.70%

5

7.90%

6

6.70%

7

5.80%

8

5.10%

9

4.60%

Author鈥檚 Check Amounts Exercise 21 lists the observed frequencies of leading digits from amounts on checks from seven suspect companies. Here are the observed frequencies of the leading digits from the amounts on the most recent checks written by the author at the time this exercise was created: 83, 58, 27, 21, 21, 21, 6, 4, 9. (Those observed frequencies correspond to the leading digits of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9, respectively.) Using a 0.01 significance level, test the claim that these leading digits are from a population of leading digits that conform to Benford鈥檚 law. Does the conclusion change if the significance level is 0.05?

Short Answer

Expert verified

At\(\alpha = 0.01\), there is not enough evidence to conclude thatthe observed frequencies of the leading digits are not the same as the frequencies expected from Benford鈥檚 law.

At\(\alpha = 0.05\), itcan be concluded that the observed frequencies of the leading digits from the amounts of checks are not the same as the expected frequencies using Benford鈥檚 law.

Thus, the result changes as the significance level changes.

Step by step solution

01

Given information

The frequencies of the different leading digits of the amounts of checks are recorded.

02

Check the requirements

Assume that random sampling is conducted.

Let O denote the observed frequencies of the leading digits.

The observed frequencies are noted below:

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{O_1} = 83\\{O_2} = 58\;\;\\{O_3} = 27\;\;\\{O_4} = 21\end{aligned}\)

\({O_5} = 21\)

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{O_6} = 21\\{O_7} = 6\;\;\\{O_8} = 4\;\;\\{O_9} = 9\end{aligned}\)

The sum of all observed frequencies is computed below:

\(\begin{aligned}{c}n = 83 + 58 + ... + 9\\ = 250\end{aligned}\)

Let E denote the expected frequencies.

Let the expected proportion and expected frequencies of the ith digit as given by Benford鈥檚 law.

Leading Digits

Benford's Law: Distributuon of leading digits

Proportions

Expected Frequencies

1

30.10%

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{p_1} = \frac{{30.1}}{{100}}\\ = 0.301\end{aligned}\)

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{E_1} = n{p_1}\\ = 250\left( {0.301} \right)\\ = 75.25\end{aligned}\)

2

17.60%

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{p_2} = \frac{{17.6}}{{100}}\\ = 0.176\end{aligned}\)

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{E_2} = n{p_2}\\ = 250\left( {0.176} \right)\\ = 44\end{aligned}\)

3

12.50%

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{p_3} = \frac{{12.5}}{{100}}\\ = 0.125\end{aligned}\)

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{E_3} = n{p_3}\\ = 250\left( {0.125} \right)\\ = 31.25\end{aligned}\)

4

9.70%

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{p_4} = \frac{{9.7}}{{100}}\\ = 0.097\end{aligned}\)

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{E_4} = n{p_4}\\ = 250\left( {0.097} \right)\\ = 24.25\end{aligned}\)

5

7.90%

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{p_5} = \frac{{7.9}}{{100}}\\ = 0.079\end{aligned}\)

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{E_5} = n{p_5}\\ = 250\left( {0.079} \right)\\ = 19.75\end{aligned}\)

6

6.70%

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{p_6} = \frac{{6.7}}{{100}}\\ = 0.067\end{aligned}\)

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{E_6} = n{p_6}\\ = 250\left( {0.067} \right)\\ = 16.75\end{aligned}\)

7

5.80%

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{p_7} = \frac{{5.8}}{{100}}\\ = 0.058\end{aligned}\)

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{E_7} = n{p_7}\\ = 250\left( {0.058} \right)\\ = 14.5\end{aligned}\)

8

5.10%

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{p_8} = \frac{{5.1}}{{100}}\\ = 0.051\end{aligned}\)

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{E_8} = n{p_8}\\ = 250\left( {0.051} \right)\\ = 12.75\end{aligned}\)

9

4.60%

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{p_9} = \frac{{4.6}}{{100}}\\ = 0.046\end{aligned}\)

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{E_9} = n{p_9}\\ = 250\left( {0.046} \right)\\ = 11.5\end{aligned}\)

Since the expected values are larger than 5, the requirements of the test are met.

03

State the hypotheses

The null hypothesis for conducting the given test is as follows:

The observed frequencies of leading digits are the same as the frequencies expected from Benford鈥檚 law.

The alternative hypothesis is as follows:

The observed frequencies of leading digits are not the same as the frequencies expected from Benford鈥檚 law.

04

Conduct the hypothesis

The table below shows the necessary calculations:

Leading Digits

O

E

\(\left( {O - E} \right)\)

\(\frac{{{{\left( {O - E} \right)}^2}}}{E}\)

1

83

75.25

7.75

0.798173

2

58

44

14

4.454545

3

27

31.25

-4.25

0.578

4

21

24.25

-3.25

0.435567

5

21

19.75

1.25

0.079114

6

21

16.75

4.25

1.078358

7

6

14.5

-8.5

4.982759

8

4

12.75

-8.75

6.004902

9

9

11.5

-2.5

0.54348

The value of the test statistic is equal to:

\(\begin{aligned}{c}{\chi ^2} = \sum {\frac{{{{\left( {O - E} \right)}^2}}}{E}} \\ = 0.798173 + 4.454545 + ....... + 0.543478\\ = 18.955\end{aligned}\)

Thus,\({\chi ^2} = 18.955\).

Let k be the number of digits, which are 9.

The degrees of freedom for\({\chi ^2}\)is computed below:

\(\begin{aligned}{c}df = k - 1\\ = 9 - 1\\ = 8\end{aligned}\)

05

State the conclusion

Using the chi-square table, the critical value of\({\chi ^2}\)at\(\alpha = 0.01\)with 8 degrees of freedom is equal to 20.090.

The p-value is,

\(\begin{aligned}{c}p - value = P\left( {{\chi ^2} > 18.955} \right)\\ = 0.015\end{aligned}\).

Since the test statistic value is less than the critical value and the p-value is greater than 0.01, thenull hypothesis is failed to be rejected.

There is enough evidence to conclude that the observed frequencies of the leading digits are the same as the frequencies expected from Benford鈥檚 law.

06

Change the level of significance to 0.05

The value of the chi-square test statistic is equal to 18.955.

The critical value of\({\chi ^2}\)at\(\alpha = 0.05\)with 8 degrees of freedom is equal to 15.507.

The p-value is,

\(\begin{aligned}{c}p - value = P\left( {{\chi ^2} > 18.955} \right)\\ = 0.015\end{aligned}\)

Since the test statistic value is greater than the critical value and the p-value is less than 0.05, the null hypothesis is rejected at a 0.05 level of significance.

Thus, it can be concluded that the observed frequencies of the leading digits from the amounts of checks are not the same as the expected frequencies using Benford鈥檚 law.

Thus, the conclusion changes as the level of significance changes from 0.01 to 0.05.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with 91影视!

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

In a study of high school students at least 16 years of age, researchers obtained survey results summarized in the accompanying table (based on data from 鈥淭exting While Driving and Other Risky Motor Vehicle Behaviors Among U.S. High School Students,鈥 by O鈥橫alley, Shults, and Eaton, Pediatrics,Vol. 131, No. 6). Use a 0.05 significance level to

test the claim of independence between texting while driving and driving when drinking alcohol. Are those two risky behaviors independent of each other?


Drove when drinking Alcohol?


Yes

No

Texted while driving

731

3054

No Texting while driving

156

4564

Benford鈥檚 Law. According to Benford鈥檚 law, a variety of different data sets include numbers with leading (first) digits that follow the distribution shown in the table below. In Exercises 21鈥24, test for goodness-of-fit with the distribution described by Benford鈥檚 law.

Leading Digits

Benford's Law: Distributuon of leading digits

1

30.10%

2

17.60%

3

12.50%

4

9.70%

5

7.90%

6

6.70%

7

5.80%

8

5.10%

9

4.60%

Author鈥檚 Computer Files The author recorded the leading digits of the sizes of the electronic document files for the current edition of this book. The leading digits have frequencies of 55, 25, 17, 24, 18, 12, 12, 3, and 4 (corresponding to the leading digits of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9, respectively). Using a 0.05 significance level, test for goodness-of-fit with Benford鈥檚 law.

Mendelian Genetics Experiments are conducted with hybrids of two types of peas. If the offspring follow Mendel鈥檚 theory of inheritance, the seeds that are produced are yellow smooth, green smooth, yellow wrinkled, and green wrinkled, and they should occur in the ratio of 9:3:3:1, respectively. An experiment is designed to test Mendel鈥檚 theory, with the result that the offspring seeds consist of 307 that are yellow smooth, 77 that are green smooth, 98 that are yellow wrinkled, and 18 that are green wrinkled. Use a 0.05 significance level to test the claim that the results contradict Mendel鈥檚 theory.

Loaded Die The author drilled a hole in a die and filled it with a lead weight, then proceeded to roll it 200 times. Here are the observed frequencies for the outcomes of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, respectively: 27, 31, 42, 40, 28, and 32. Use a 0.05 significance level to test the claim that the outcomes are not equally likely. Does it appear that the loaded die behaves differently than a fair die?

In his book Outliers,author Malcolm Gladwell argues that more

American-born baseball players have birth dates in the months immediately following July 31 because that was the age cutoff date for nonschool baseball leagues. The table below lists months of births for a sample of American-born baseball players and foreign-born baseball players. Using a 0.05 significance level, is there sufficient evidence to warrant rejection of the claim that months of births of baseball players are independent of whether they are born in America? Do the data appear to support Gladwell鈥檚 claim?


Born in America

Foreign Born

Jan.

387

101

Feb.

329

82

March

366

85

April

344

82

May

336

94

June

313

83

July

313

59

Aug.

503

91

Sept.

421

70

Oct.

434

100

Nov.

398

103

Dec.

371

82

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Math Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.