/*! 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} Q8 E Tensile-strength tests were carr... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91影视

91影视

Tensile-strength tests were carried out on two different grades of wire rod (鈥淔luidized Bed Patenting of Wire Rods,鈥 Wire J., June \(1977: 56 - 61)\), resulting in the accompanying data

Sample

Sample Mean Sample

Grade Size (kg/mm2 ) SD

\(\overline {\underline {\begin{array}{*{20}{l}}{ AISI 1064}&{m = 129}&{\bar x = 107.6}&{{s_1} = 1.3}\\{ AISI 1078}&{n = 129}&{\bar y = 123.6}&{{s_2} = 2.0}\\{}&{}&{}&{}\end{array}} } \)

a. Does the data provide compelling evidence for concluding that true average strength for the \(1078\) grade exceeds that for the \(1064\) grade by more than \(10kg/m{m^2}\) ? Test the appropriate hypotheses using a significance level of \(.01\).

b. Estimate the difference between true average strengths for the two grades in a way that provides information about precision and reliability

Short Answer

Expert verified

the solution is

a)There is adequate evidence to support the allegation that the genuine average strength of the \(1078\)grade is more than \(10kg/m{m^2}\) more than that of the \(1064\) grade.

b)\(( - 16.4116, - 15.5884)\)

Step by step solution

01

test the appropriate hypotheses

  1. given:

\(\begin{array}{l}{{\bar x}_1} = 107.6\\{{\bar x}_2} = 123.6\\{s_1} = 1.3\\{s_2} = 2.0\end{array}\)

\(\begin{array}{l}{n_1} = 129\\{n_2} = 129\\\alpha = 0.01\end{array}\)

We may use the \(z\)-test because the samples are large \(\left( {n > 30} \right)\). (instead of a t-test).

Assumption: exceed by more than \(10\)

Either the null hypothesis or the alternative hypothesis is asserted. The null hypothesis and the alternative hypothesis are diametrically opposed. An equality must be included in the null hypothesis.

\(\begin{array}{l}{H_0}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} = - 10\\{H_a}:{\mu _1} - {\mu _2} > - 10\end{array}\)

Determine the value of the test statistic:

\(z = \frac{{{{\bar x}_1} - {{\bar x}_2} - \left( {{\mu _1} - {\mu _2}} \right)}}{{\sqrt {\frac{{s_1^2}}{{{n_1}}} + \frac{{s_2^2}}{{{n_2}}}} }} = \frac{{107.6 - 123.6 - ( - 10)}}{{\sqrt {\frac{{1.{3^2}}}{{129}} + \frac{{2.{0^2}}}{{129}}} }} \approx - 28.57\)

If the null hypothesis is true, the \(P\)-value is the probability of getting a result more extreme or equal to the standardized test statistic \(z\). Using the normal probability table, determine the probability.

\(P = P(Z < - 28.57 or Z > 28.57) = 2P(Z < - 28.57) \approx 2(0) = 0\)

The null hypothesis is rejected if the P-value is less than the alpha significance level.

\(P < 0.01 \Rightarrow Reject {H_0}\)

There is adequate evidence to support the allegation that the genuine average strength of the \(1078\)grade is more than \(10kg/m{m^2}\) more than that of the \(1064\) grade.

02

given

b)

\(\begin{array}{l}{{\bar x}_1} = 107.6\\{{\bar x}_2} = 123.6\\{s_1} = 1.3\\{s_2} = 2.0\end{array}\)

\(\begin{array}{l}{n_1} = 129\\{n_2} = 129\end{array}\)

We will compute a \(95\% \) confidence interval, confidence intervals with other confidence levels can be calculated similarly.

\(c = 95\% = 0.95\)

03

confidence interval

for confidence interval\(1 - \alpha = 0.95,\) determine \({z_{\alpha /2}} = {z_{0.025}}\) using the normal probability table ( look up \(0.025\) in the table, the \(z\)-score is then the found \(z\)-score with opposite sign):

\({z_{\alpha /2}} = 1.96\)

The margin of error then becomes:

\({z_{\alpha /2}} = 1.96E = {z_{\alpha /2}} \times \sqrt {\frac{{\sigma _1^2}}{{{n_1}}} + \frac{{\sigma _2^2}}{{{n_2}}}} = 1.96 \times \sqrt {\frac{{1.{3^2}}}{{129}} + \frac{{2.{0^2}}}{{129}}} \)\( \approx 0.4116\)

The endpoints of the confidence interval of \({\mu _1} - {\mu _2}\) are:

\(\begin{array}{l}\left( {{{\bar x}_1} - {{\bar x}_2}} \right) - E = (107.6 - 123.6) - 0.4116 = - 16 - 0.4116 = - 16.4116\\\left( {{{\bar x}_1} - {{\bar x}_2}} \right) + E = (107.6 - 123.6) + 0.4116 = - 16 + 0.4116 = - 15.5884\end{array}\)

04

conclusion

a)There is adequate evidence to support the allegation that the genuine average strength of the \(1078\)grade is more than \(10kg/m{m^2}\) more than that of the \(1064\) grade.

b)\(( - 16.4116, - 15.5884)\)

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

Quantitative noninvasive techniques are needed for routinely assessing symptoms of peripheral neuropathies, such as carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). The article "A Gap Detection Tactility Test for Sensory Deficits Associated with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome" (Ergonomics, \(1995: 2588 - 2601\)) reported on a test that involved sensing a tiny gap in an otherwise smooth surface by probing with a finger; this functionally resembles many work-related tactile activities, such as detecting scratches or surface defects. When finger probing was not allowed, the sample average gap detection threshold for\(m = 8\)normal subjects was\(1.71\;mm\), and the sample standard deviation was\(.53\); for\(n = 10\)CTS subjects, the sample mean and sample standard deviation were\(2.53\)and\(.87\), respectively. Does this data suggest that the true average gap detection threshold for CTS subjects exceeds that for normal subjects? State and test the relevant hypotheses using a significance level of\(.01\).

Consider the pooled\(t\)variable

\(T = \frac{{(\bar X - \bar Y) - \left( {{\mu _1} - {\mu _2}} \right)}}{{{S_p}\sqrt {\frac{1}{m} + \frac{1}{n}} }}\)

which has a\(t\)distribution with\(m + n - 2\)df when both population distributions are normal with\({\sigma _1} = {\sigma _2}\)(see the Pooled\(t\)Procedures subsection for a description of\({S_p}\)).

a. Use this\(t\)variable to obtain a pooled\(t\)confidence interval formula for\({\mu _1} - {\mu _2}\).

b. A sample of ultrasonic humidifiers of one particular brand was selected for which the observations on maximum output of moisture (oz) in a controlled chamber were\(14.0, 14.3, 12.2\), and 15.1. A sample of the second brand gave output values\(12.1, 13.6\),\(11.9\), and\(11.2\)("Multiple Comparisons of Means Using Simultaneous Confidence Intervals," J. of Quality Technology, \(1989: 232 - 241\)). Use the pooled\(t\)formula from part (a) to estimate the difference between true average outputs for the two brands with a\(95\% \)confidence interval.

c. Estimate the difference between the two\(\mu \)'s using the two-sample\(t\)interval discussed in this section, and compare it to the interval of part (b).

Anorexia Nervosa (AN) is a psychiatric condition leading to substantial weight loss among women who are fearful of becoming fat. The article "Adipose Tissue Distribution After Weight Restoration and Weight Maintenance in Women with Anorexia Nervosa" (Amer. J. of ClinicalNutr., 2009: 1132-1137) used whole-body magnetic resonance imagery to determine various tissue characteristics for both an AN sample of individuals who had undergone acute weight restoration and maintained their weight for a year and a comparable (at the outset of the study) control sample. Here is summary data on intermuscular adipose tissue (IAT; kg).

Assume that both samples were selected from normal distributions.

a. Calculate an estimate for true average IAT under the described AN protocol, and do so in a way that conveys information about the reliability and precision of the estimation.

b. Calculate an estimate for the difference between true average AN IAT and true average control IAT, and do so in a way that conveys information about the reliability and precision of the estimation. What does your estimate suggest about true average AN IAT relative to true average control IAT?

It is well known that a placebo, a fake medication or treatment, can sometimes have a positive effect just because patients often expect the medication or treatment to be helpful. The article "Beware the Nocebo Effect" (New York Times, Aug. 12, 2012) gave examples of a less familiar phenomenon, the tendency for patients informed of possible side effects to actually experience those side effects. The article cited a study reported in The Journal of Sexual Medicine in which a group of patients diagnosed with benign prostatic hyperplasia was randomly divided into two subgroups. One subgroup of size 55 received a compound of proven efficacy along with counseling that a potential side effect of the treatment was erectile dysfunction. The other subgroup of size 52 was given the same treatment without counseling. The percentage of the no-counseling subgroup that reported one or more sexual side effects was 15.3 %, whereas 43.6 % of the counseling subgroup reported at least one sexual side effect. State and test the appropriate hypotheses at significance level .05 to decide whether the nocebo effect is operating here. (Note: The estimated expected number of "successes" in the no-counseling sample is a bit shy of 10, but not by enough to be of great concern (some sources use a less conservative cutoff of 5 rather than 10).)

Refer to Example 9.7. Does the data suggest that the standard deviation of the strength distribution for fused specimens is smaller than that for not-fused specimens? Carry out a test at significance level .01.

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.