/*! 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} Q21E The article 鈥淭he Effect of Enz... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91影视

91影视

The article 鈥淭he Effect of Enzyme Inducing Agents on the Survival Times of Rats Exposed to Lethal Levels of Nitrogen Dioxide鈥 (Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 1978: 169鈥174) reports the following data on survival times for rats exposed to nitrogen dioxide (70 ppm) via different injection regimens. There were J = 14 rats in each group.

a. Test the null hypothesis that true average survival time does not depend on an injection regimen against the alternative that there is some dependence on an injection regimen using a 5 .01.

b. Suppose that 100\(\left( {1 - \alpha } \right)\)% CIs for k different parametric functions are computed from the same ANOVA data set. Then it is easily verified that the simultaneous confidence level is at least 100\(\left( {1 - k\alpha } \right)\)%. Compute CIs with a simultaneous confidence level of at least 98% for\({\mu _1} - 1/5\left( {{\mu _2} + {\mu _3} + {\mu _4} + {\mu _5} + {\mu _6}} \right)\)and\(1/4\left( {{\mu _2} + {\mu _3} + {\mu _4} + {\mu _5}} \right) - {\mu _6}\).

Short Answer

Expert verified

The part a and part b is

  1. Reject null hypothesis
  2. \(\left( { - 99.16,\, - 35.64} \right)\), \(\left( {29.34,\,\,\,94.16} \right)\)

Step by step solution

01

Step 1: Test the null hypothesisPart(a)

The hypotheses of interest are

\({H_0}:\,\,\,{\mu _1} = {\mu _j},\,i \ne j\,\)

Versus alternative hypothesis

\({H_a}:\)At least two of the \({\mu _i}\)鈥榮 is different,

Where is the true average survival time of corresponding regimen.

Notice first that

\(I = 6\),treatments,

and

\(J = 14,\)samples of each type 鈥 rats

The following table needs to be filled with corresponding values:

The degree of freedom is

\(\begin{aligned}{l}\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,I - 1 = 6 - 1 = 5;\\I \cdot \left( {J - 1} \right) = 6 \cdot \left( {14 - 1} \right) = 78;\\\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,I \cdot J - 1 = 6\, \cdot `14 - 1 = 83.\end{aligned}\)

Denote with

\(\begin{aligned}{l}{x_i} = \sum\limits_{j = 1}^J {{x_{i\,j}}} \,;\\{x_{ \cdot \cdot }} = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^I {\,\sum\limits_{j = 1}^J {\,{x_{i\,j}}} \,;\,} \end{aligned}\)

The

total sum of squares

(SST),

treatment sum of squares

(SSTr), and

error sum of squares

(SSE) are given by

\(\begin{aligned}{l}\,\,\,\,\,SST = {\sum\limits_{i = 1}^I {\,\sum\limits_{j = 1}^J \, \left( {\,{x_{i\,j}} - \mathop x\limits^\_ ..} \right)} ^2} = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^I \, \sum\limits_{j = 1}^J \, x_{_{i\,j}}^2 - \frac{1}{{I - J}}x_{ \cdot \cdot }^2\,;\\SST = {\sum\limits_{i = 1}^I {\,\sum\limits_{j = 1}^J \, \left( {\,{{\mathop x\limits^\_ }_{i\,.}} - \mathop x\limits^\_ ..} \right)} ^2} = \frac{1}{J} \cdot \sum\limits_{i = 1}^I \, x_{_{i\,.}}^2 - \frac{1}{{I - J}}x_{ \cdot \cdot }^2\,;\\\,\,\,\,\,SST = {\sum\limits_{i = 1}^I {\,\sum\limits_{j = 1}^J \, \left( {\,{x_{i\,j}} - {{\mathop x\limits^\_ }_{i.}}} \right)} ^2} = \left( {J - 1} \right)\sum\limits_{i = 1}^i \, s_i^2\end{aligned}\)

The mean squares are

\(\begin{aligned}{l}MSTr = \frac{1}{{I - 1}}.\,SSTr;\\\,\,\,\,\,MSE = \frac{1}{{I\,\, \cdot \,\,\left( {J - 1} \right)}}.\,SSE\,.\end{aligned}\)

F is ratio of the two mean squares

\(F = \frac{{MSTr}}{{MSE}}\)

Compute all the values one by one. Values of

\({\mathop x\limits^\_ _{i.}}\, = \frac{1}{J} \cdot {x_{i\,.}}\)

Are given in the exercise as

\(\begin{aligned}{l}{\mathop x\limits^\_ _{1.}}\, = 166;\\{\mathop x\limits^\_ _{2.}}\, = 303;\\{\mathop x\limits^\_ _{3.}}\, = 266;\\{\mathop x\limits^\_ _{4.}}\, = 212;\\{\mathop x\limits^\_ _{5.}}\, = 202;\\{\mathop x\limits^\_ _{6.}}\, = 184;\end{aligned}\)

The grand mean \(\mathop x\limits^\_ ..\) is

\(\begin{aligned}{l}\mathop x\limits^\_ .. = \frac{1}{{I - J}}\,\,\sum\limits_{i = 1}^I \, \sum\limits_{j = 1}^J \, {x_{i\,j}} = \frac{1}{I}.\,\sum\limits_{i = 1}^6 \, {\mathop x\limits^\_ _{i.}}\,\\ = \frac{1}{6}.\left( {166 + 303 + 266 + 212 + 202 + 184} \right)\\ = 222.17\end{aligned}\)

The treatment sum of squares is

\(\begin{aligned}{l}SSTr = {\sum\limits_{i = 1}^I {\,\sum\limits_{j = 1}^J \, \left( {{{\mathop x\limits^\_ }_{i\,.}} - \mathop x\limits^\_ ..} \right)} ^2} = J\, \cdot \,\,\sum\limits_{i = 1}^6 \, \cdot {\left( {{{\mathop x\limits^\_ }_{i\,.}} - \mathop x\limits^\_ ..} \right)^2}\\\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\, = 14.\left( {{{\left( {166 - 222.17} \right)}^2} + {{\left( {303 - 222.17} \right)}^2} + \cdots + {{\left( {184 - 222.17} \right)}^2}} \right)\\\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\, = 14.13,\,577.83\\\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\, = 190,\,076\end{aligned}\)

The error sum of squares is

\(\begin{aligned}{l}SSE = {\sum\limits_{i = 1}^I {\,\sum\limits_{j = 1}^J \, \left( {\,{x_{i\,j}} - {{\mathop x\limits^\_ }_{i.}}} \right)} ^2} = \left( {J - 1} \right)\sum\limits_{i = 1}^i \, s_i^2\\\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\, = \left( {14 - 1} \right).\,\left( {{{32}^2} + {{53}^2} + \cdots + {{31}^2}} \right)\\\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\, = 13.10,\,091\\\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\, = 131,\,183\end{aligned}\)

Fundamental Identity:

\(SST = SSTr + SSE\).

Error sum of squares is

\(SST = SSTr + SSE = 190,\,076 + 131,\,183 = 321,\,\,259\)

The mean squares can be computed now as

\(\begin{aligned}{l}MSTr = \frac{1}{{I - 1}}.\,SSTr = \frac{1}{5}.109,\,076 = 38,\,015.1;\\MSE = \frac{1}{{I\,\, \cdot \,\,\left( {J - 1} \right)}}.\,SSE = \frac{1}{{6\,\, \cdot \,\,\left( {14 - 1} \right)}} \cdot 131,\,183 = 1681.83\end{aligned}\)

The value of F statistic is

\(f = \frac{{MSTr}}{{MSE}} = \frac{{38,\,015.1}}{{1681.83}} = 22.6\)

The ANOVA table now becomes

As for usual tests, you can either make conclusion about the hypotheses look at the F critical value or a P value. Remember that the hypotheses of interest are

\({H_0}:\,\,\,{\mu _1} = {\mu _j},\,i \ne j\,\)

Versus alternative hypothesis

\({H_a}:\)At least two of the \(\mu - i\)鈥榮 is different,

The P value is the area to the right of f value under the F curve where F has Fisher's distribution with degrees of freedom 5 and 78; thus

\(P = P\left( {F > f} \right) = P\left( {F > 22.6} \right) \approx 0\)

Which was computed using software (you could estimate it using the table in the appendix). Because

\(P = 0 < 0.01 = \alpha \)

at given significance level. There is statistically significance difference in true averages among the six different survival times.

Using the table, you could use e.g., value \({F_{0.01,5,60}}\) (this is approximate) for which the area under the F curve to the right of \({F_{0.01,5,60}}\) is 0.01. The value is

\({F_{0.01,5,60}} = 4.76 < 22.6 = f\),

Which indicates to reject null hypothesis at significance level 0.01

02

Find first level and second levelPart(b)

First interval:

Mean square error is

\(MSE = 1681.83\)

Using the fact that random variable

\(\theta = {\mathop X\limits^\_ _1}\, - \,\frac{1}{5}.\,\left( {{{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_2} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_3} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_4} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_5} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_6}} \right)\)

has approximately student distribution with \(\,\left( {J - 1} \right) = 78\) degrees of freedom, from the fact

\(P\left( {{t_{\alpha /2,78}}\, < \,{{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_1}\, - \,\frac{1}{5}.\,\left( {{{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_2} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_3} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_4} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_5} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_6}} \right)\,\, < {t_{\alpha /2,78}}} \right) = 1 - \alpha \)

Where, in this case, \(\alpha = 0.02\) and from the table in the appendix is approximately

\({t_{\alpha /2,78}} = {t_{0.01,\,78}} = 2.645\)

The 98% confidence interval is \({\sigma ^2}\).

\(\sum\limits_{i = 1}^6 \, {c_i}{\mathop x\limits^\_ _i}. \pm {t_{\alpha /2,I(J - I\~)}}.\sqrt {\frac{{MSE\,\, \cdot \,\sum\nolimits_{i = 1}^6 {c_i^2} }}{J}\,} \)

Here MSE is estimate of variance \({\sigma ^2}\).

Since \({c_1} = 1\) and \({c_i} = - 1/5,\)\(i = 2,3, \ldots ,6\)

\(\sum\limits_{i = 1}^6 \, c_i^2 = 1.2\)

Also, estimate of \(\theta \) is

\(\theta = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^6 \, {c_i}{\mathop x\limits^\_ _i}. = {\mathop X\limits^\_ _1}\, - \,\frac{1}{5}.\,\left( {{{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_2} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_3} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_4} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_5} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_6}} \right) = - 67.4\)

Where all values are given in the table in the exercise. Therefore, the 98% confidence interval for \(\theta \) is

\( - 67.4 \pm 2.645\, \cdot \,\sqrt {\frac{{1681.83 \cdot 1.2}}{{14}}} \)

or equally

\(\left( { - 99.16,\, - 35.64} \right)\)

Second interval:

Mean square error is

\(MSE = 1681.83\)

Using the fact that random variable

\(\theta = 0 \cdot {\mathop X\limits^\_ _1}\, + \,\frac{1}{4}.\,\left( {{{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_2} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_3} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_4} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_5}} \right)\,\, - {\mathop X\limits^\_ _6}\,\)

has approximately student distribution with \(\,\left( {J - 1} \right) = 78\) degrees of freedom, from the fact

\(P\left( {{t_{\alpha /2,78}}\, < \,{{\mathop {0 \cdot X}\limits^{\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\_} }_1}\, + \,\frac{1}{4}.\,\left( {{{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_2} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_3} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_4} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_5}} \right)\, - \,{{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_6} < {t_{\alpha /2,78}}} \right) = 1 - \alpha \)

Where, in this case, \(\alpha = 0.02\) and from the table in the appendix is approximately

\({t_{\alpha /2,78}} = {t_{0.01,\,78}} = 2.645\)

The 98% confidence interval is

\(\sum\limits_{i = 1}^6 \, {c_i}{\mathop x\limits^\_ _i}. \pm {t_{\alpha /2,I(J - I\~)}}.\sqrt {\frac{{MSE\,\, \cdot \,\sum\nolimits_{i = 1}^6 {c_i^2} }}{J}\,} \)

Here MSE is estimate of variance \({\sigma ^2}\).

Since \({c_1} = 0\),\({c_i} = - 1/4,\,\,i = 2,3, \ldots ,5\,\)and \({c_6} = - 1\)

\(\sum\limits_{i = 1}^6 \, c_i^2 = 1.25\)

Also, estimate of \(\theta \) is

\(\theta = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^6 \, {c_i}{\mathop x\limits^\_ _i}. = {\mathop {0 \cdot X}\limits^\_ _1}\, + \,\frac{1}{4}.\,\left( {{{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_2} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_3} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_4} + {{\mathop X\limits^\_ }_5}} \right) - \,{\mathop X\limits^\_ _6} = - 61.75\)

Where all values are given in the table in the exercise. Therefore, the 98% confidence interval for \(\theta \) is

\(61.75 \pm 2.645\, \cdot \,\sqrt {\frac{{1681.83 \cdot 1.25}}{{14}}} \)

or equally

\(\left( {29.34,\,\,\,94.16} \right)\)

Here, the result of part(a), part(b) is

  1. Reject null hypothesis
  2. \(\left( { - 99.16,\, - 35.64} \right)\), \(\left( {29.34,\,\,\,94.16} \right)\)

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 Exercise \(11\) suppose \({\overline x _{3.}} = 427.5.\) now which true average spreading rates differ significantly from one another? Be sure to use the method of underscoring to illustrate your conclusion, and write a paragraph summarizing your results.

An experiment was carried out to compare flow rates for four different types of nozzle.

a. Sample sizes were 5, 6, 7, and 6, respectively, and calculations gave f = 3.68. State and test the relevant hypotheses using \(\alpha = 0.1\)

b. Analysis of the data using a statistical computer package yielded P-value = 0.29. At level .01, what would you conclude, and why?

In an experiment to compare the tensile strengths of different type of\({\bf{I = 5}}\) copper wire, \({\bf{J = 4}}\) samples of each type were used. The between-samples and within- sample estimates of \({{\bf{\sigma }}^{\bf{2}}}\) were computed as \({\bf{MS}}{{\bf{T}}_{\bf{r}}}{\bf{ = 2673}}{\bf{.3}}\) and respectively. Use the F test at level. to test \({{\bf{H}}_{\bf{0}}}\,{\bf{:}}\,\,{{\bf{\mu }}_{\bf{1}}}{\bf{ = }}{{\bf{\mu }}_{\bf{2}}}{\bf{ = }}{{\bf{\mu }}_{\bf{3}}}{\bf{ = }}{{\bf{\mu }}_{\bf{4}}}{\bf{ = }}{{\bf{\mu }}_{\bf{5}}}\)versus \({{\bf{H}}_{\bf{a}}}{\bf{:}}\)at least two \({{\bf{\mu }}_{\bf{i}}}{\bf{'s}}\) are unequal.

Referring to Exercise 38, construct

\(\theta = {\mu _1} - ({\mu _2} + {\mu _3} + {\mu _4} + {\mu _5})/4\)

which measures the difference between the average DNA content for the starch diet and the combined average for the four other diets. Does the resulting interval include zero?

A study of the properties of mental plate 鈥揷onnected trusses used for roof support (鈥淢odeling joints made with Light-Gauge metal connector plates,鈥 Forest products J., 1979:39-44) yielded the following observations on axial-stiffness index(kips/in.) for plate lengths \(4,6,8.10,12\)in:

\(\begin{aligned}{l}4:309.2\\6:402.1\\8:392.4\\10:346.7\\12:407.4\end{aligned}\) \(\begin{aligned}{l}409.5\\347.2\\366.2\\452.9\\441.8\end{aligned}\) \(\begin{aligned}{l}311.0\\361.0\\351.0\\461.4\\419.9\end{aligned}\) \(\begin{aligned}{l}326.5\\404.5\\357.1\\433.1\\410.7\end{aligned}\) \(\begin{aligned}{l}316.8\\331.0\\409.9\\410.6\\473.4\end{aligned}\) \(\begin{aligned}{l}349.8\\348.9\\367.3\\384.2\\441.2\end{aligned}\) \(\begin{aligned}{l}309.7\\381.7\\382.0\\362.6\\465.8\end{aligned}\)

Does variation in plate length have any effect on true average axial stiffness? state and test the relevant hypotheses using analysis of variance with Display your results in an ANOVA table.(Hint : \({\sum x ^2}_{ij.} = 5,241,420.79.)\)

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.