/*! 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} Q42SE The critical flicker frequency \... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91影视

91影视

The critical flicker frequency \(\left( {cff} \right)\) is the highest frequency at which a person can detect the flicker in a flickering light source. At frequencies above the cff, the light source appear to be continuous even though it is actually flickering. An investigation carried out to see whether true average cff depends on iris color yielded the following data (based on the article 鈥淭he Effects of Iris Color on Critical Flicker Frequency鈥.

Iris color

1.Brown

2.Green

3.Blue

\({\bf{26}}.{\bf{8}}\)

\({\bf{26}}.{\bf{4}}\)

\({\bf{25}}.{\bf{7}}\)

\({\bf{27}}.{\bf{9}}\)

\({\bf{24}}.{\bf{2}}\)

\({\bf{27}}.{\bf{2}}\)

\({\bf{23}}.{\bf{7}}\)

\({\bf{28}}.{\bf{0}}\)

\({\bf{29}}.{\bf{9}}\)

\({\bf{25}}.{\bf{0}}\)

\({\bf{26}}.{\bf{9}}\)

\({\bf{28}}.{\bf{5}}\)

\({\bf{26}}.{\bf{3}}\)

\({\bf{29}}.{\bf{1}}\)

\({\bf{29}}.{\bf{4}}\)

\({\bf{24}}.{\bf{8}}\)

\({\bf{28}}.{\bf{3}}\)

\({\bf{25}}.{\bf{7}}\)

\({\bf{24}}.{\bf{5}}\)

\({J_i}\)

\({\bf{8}}\)

\({\bf{5}}\)

\({\bf{6}}\)

\({x_i}\)

\({\bf{204}}.{\bf{7}}\)

\({\bf{134}}.{\bf{6}}\)

\({\bf{169}}.{\bf{0}}\)

\({\overline x _i}\)

\({\bf{25}}.{\bf{59}}\)

\({\bf{26}}.{\bf{92}}\)

\({\bf{28}}.{\bf{17}}\)

\(n = 19,{x_{..}} = 508.3\)

  1. State and test the relevant hypotheses at significance level\(.05\)(Hint:\(\sum {\sum {{x_{ij}}^2} = 13659.67,CF = 13598.36} \))
  2. Investigate difference between iris colors with respect to mean cff.

Short Answer

Expert verified

For the part \(\left( a \right)\), we need to reject the null hypotheses. And for the problem part \(\left( b \right)\)gives that there is only statistical difference between the brown and blue color.

Step by step solution

01

Deriving the formula for Hypotheses

The hypothesis of interest are\({H_0}:{\mu _i} = {\mu _j},i \ne j\)versus alternative hypothesis\({H_a}:At{\rm{ }}least{\rm{ }}two{\rm{ }}of{\rm{ }}the\,\,\,\mu \_i's\)are different, where\({\mu _i}\)is the true average of CFF for\(3\)colours,\(i = 1,2,3\)

Let\({J_i},i = 1,2,...,l\)be the sample sizes of\(I\)treatments, and let\(n = \int\limits_{i = 1}^l {{J_i}} \)be the total number of observations.

Let us denote with

\(\begin{aligned}{l}{x_i} = \int\limits_{j = 1}^{{J_i}} {{x_{ij}}} \\{x_{..}} = \int\limits_{i = 1}^I {\int\limits_{j = 1}^{{J_i}} {{x_{ij}}} } \end{aligned}\)

02

Formula for SST,SSTr,SSE and the Degrees of Freedom

The total sum of squares\(\left( {SST} \right)\), the treatment sum of squares\(\left( {SSTr} \right)\), the error sum of squares\(\left( {SSE} \right)\)are given by,

\(\begin{aligned}{l}SST = {\int\limits_{i = 1}^I {\int\limits_{j = 1}^{{J_i}} {\left( {{x_{ij}} - \overline x ..} \right)} } ^2} = \int\limits_{i = 1}^I {\int\limits_{j = 1}^{{J_i}} \begin{aligned}{l}{x_{ij}}^2 - \frac{1}{n}{x_{..}}^2;\\\end{aligned} } \\SSTr = \int\limits_{i = 1}^I {\int\limits_{j = 1}^{{J_i}} {{{\left( {{{\overline x }_i} - {{\overline x }_{..}}} \right)}^2} = \frac{1}{{{J_i}}} \times \int\limits_{i = 1}^I {{x^2}_i - \frac{1}{n}{x_{..}}^2;} } } \\SSE = \int\limits_{i = 1}^I {\int\limits_{j = 1}^{{J_i}} {{{\left( {{x_{ij}} - {{\overline x }_{i.}}} \right)}^2}} } = \int\limits_{i = 1}^I {\left( {{J_i} - 1} \right){s_i}^2} \end{aligned}\)

With degrees of freedom, respectively,

\(\begin{aligned}{l}df = n - 1;\\df = I - 1;\\df = \int\limits_{i = 1}^I {\left( {{J_i} - 1} \right) = n - I;} \end{aligned}\)

03

Calculating the mean square and the Treatment sum of square

Fundamental Identity : \(SST = SSTr + SSE\)

The mean square are,

\(\begin{aligned}{l}MSTr = \frac{1}{{I - 1}} \times SSTr;\\MSE = \frac{1}{{n - I}} \times SSE\end{aligned}\)

\(F\)is the ratio of the two mean square,

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

The P-value is the area under \({F_{I - 1,n - I}}\) curve to the right of f.

The degrees of freedom for \(n = 133\), are,

\(\begin{aligned}{l}df = n - 1 = 19 - 1 = 18;\\df = I - 1 = 3 - 1 = 2;\\df = \int\limits_{i = 1}^I {\left( {{J_i} - 1} \right) = n - I = 19 - 3 = 16.} \end{aligned}\)

The treatment sum of square is,

\(\begin{aligned}{l}SSTr = \int\limits_{i = 1}^I {\int\limits_{j = 1}^{{J_i}} {{{\left( {{{\overline x }_i} - {{\overline x }_{..}}} \right)}^2} = \frac{1}{{{J_i}}} \times \int\limits_{i = 1}^I {{x^2}_i - \frac{1}{n}{x_{..}}^2} } } \\ = \frac{1}{8} \times {204.7^2} + \frac{1}{5} \times {134.6^2} + \frac{1}{6} \times {169.0^2} + \frac{1}{{19}} \times {508.3^2}\\ = 12621.36 - 13598.36\\ = 23\end{aligned}\)

04

Calculating the F Statistics

The total sum of square is,

\(\begin{aligned}{l}SST = \int\limits_{i = 1}^I {\int\limits_{j = 1}^{{J_i}} {{{\left( {{x_{ij}} - {{\overline x }_{..}}} \right)}^2} = \int\limits_{i = 1}^I {\int\limits_{j = 1}^{{J_i}} {{x^2}_{ij}} } } } - \frac{1}{n}{x_{..}}^2\\ = 13659.67 - 13598.36\\ = 61.31\end{aligned}\)

Fundamental Identity :

Error sum of square is \(\begin{aligned}{l}SSE = SST - SSTr\\ = 61.31 - 23 = 38.31\end{aligned}\)

The mean square is computed as,

\(\begin{aligned}{l}MSTr = \frac{1}{{I - 1}} \times SSTr = \frac{1}{2} \times 23 = 11.5;\\MSE = \frac{1}{{n - I}} \times SSE = \frac{1}{{16}} \times 38.31 = 2.39\end{aligned}\)

The value of \(F\)statistics is,

\(f = \frac{{MSTr}}{{MSE}} = \frac{{11.5}}{{2.3}} = 4.803\)

05

Concluding on the null Hypotheses

The\(P\)value is the area to the right of \(f\)value under \(F\)curve where \(F\)has Fisher鈥檚 distribution with degree of freedom \(2and16\),

\(P = P\left( {F > f} \right) = P\left( {F > 4.803} \right) = 0.02\)which was computed using the software.

Because, \(P = 0.02 < 0.05 = \alpha \)

So reject null hypotheses at significance level.

\({F_{0.05,2,16}} = 3.63 < f = 4.803 < 6.23 = {F_{0.01,2,16}}\)

Which indicates to reject the null hypothesis at significance level. The conclusion is that there is significant difference in true average for the three treatment.

06

Analysing the difference between the iris color and the CFF

For the problem \(\left( b \right)\), denote with,

\({w_{ij}} = {Q_{\alpha ,I,n - I}} \times \sqrt {\frac{{MSE}}{2} \times \frac{1}{{{J_i}}} + \frac{1}{{{J_j}}}} \)

Then the probability that

\({\overline x _i} - {\overline x _j} - {w_{ij}} < {\mu _i} - {\mu _j} < {\overline x _i} - {\overline x _j} + {w_{ij}}\)

Is approximately \(1 - \alpha \)for every \(i = 1,2,...,I\) and every \(j = 1,2,...,I\) where \(i \ne j\)

From the table in the appendix for \(\alpha = 0.05,I = 3,n - I = 16\), the following holds,

\({Q_{0.05,3,16}} = 3.65\)

Using the modified Turkey鈥檚 method to obtain the confidence interval for each pair you can conclude difference between iris colors.

07

Concluding the statistical difference between the CFF of the colors.

Given the average \({\overline x _i}and{Q_{\alpha ,I,n - I}}\) the confidence interval can be computed using the below mentioned formula,

\(\)\({\overline x _i} - {\overline x _j} - {w_{ij}} < {\mu _i} - {\mu _j} < {\overline x _i} - {\overline x _j} + {w_{ij}}\)

Compute \({w_{ij}}\),

\(\begin{aligned}{l}{w_{12}} = {Q_{0.05,3,16}} \times \sqrt {\frac{{MSE}}{2} \times \frac{1}{8} + \frac{1}{5}} = 2.27;\\{w_{13}} = {Q_{0.05,3,16}} \times \sqrt {\frac{{MSE}}{2} \times \frac{1}{8} + \frac{1}{6}} = 2.15;\\{w_{23}} = {Q_{0.05,3,16}} \times \sqrt {\frac{{MSE}}{2} \times \frac{1}{5} + \frac{1}{6}} = 2.42\end{aligned}\)

The MSE computed in the part \(\left( a \right)\) is \(MSE = 2.39\)

Hence the intervals are,

\(\begin{aligned}{l}\left( {{{\overline x }_{1.}} - {{\overline x }_{2.}} - {w_{12}},{{\overline x }_{1.}} - {{\overline x }_{2.}} + {w_{12}}} \right) = \left( { - 3.6,0.94} \right);\\\left( {{{\overline x }_{1.}} - {{\overline x }_{3.}} - {w_{13}},{{\overline x }_{1.}} - {{\overline x }_{3.}} + {w_{13}}} \right) = \left( { - 4.73, - 0.43} \right);\\\left( {{{\overline x }_{2.}} - {{\overline x }_{3.}} - {w_{23}},{{\overline x }_{2.}} - {{\overline x }_{3.}} + {w_{23}}} \right) = \left( { - 3.67,1.17} \right);\end{aligned}\)

Since only for the interval of pair \(\left( {2,3} \right)\)does not include zero, so that you can conclude that there is only statistical difference between CFF for brown and blue color.

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

An experiment was carried out to compare electrical resitivity for six different low-permeability concrete bridge deck mixtures. There were \(26\)measurements on concrete cylinders for each mixture; these were obtained days \(28\)after casting.The entries in the accompanying ANOVA table are based on information in the article 鈥淚n-place Resitivity of Bridge Deck Concrete Mixtures鈥(ACI Matrerials j.,2009: 114-122).Fill in the remaining entries and test appropriate hypothese.

The following data refers to yield of tomatoes (kg/plot) for four different levels of salinity. Salinity level here refers to electrical conductivity (EC), where the chosen levels were EC = 1.6, 3.8, 6.0, and 10.2 nmhos/cm.

Use the F test at level\(\alpha \)=.05 to test for any differences in true average yield due to the different salinity levels.

The article 鈥渙rigin of Precambrian iron formations鈥(Econ,Geology,1964;1025-1057)reports the following data on total Fe for four types of iron formation\((1 = carbonate,\,2 = silicate,\,3 = magnetite,\,4 = hematite).\)

\(\begin{aligned}{l}1:\,\,\,20.5\,\,\,\,\,\\\,\,\,\,\,\,25.2\\2:26.3\\\,\,\,\,\,\,34.0\\3:29.5\\\,\,\,\,\,\,\,26.2\\4:36.5\\\,\,\,\,\,\,33.1\end{aligned}\)\(\begin{aligned}{l}28.1\\25.3\\24.0\\17.1\\34.0\\29.9\\44.2\\34.1\end{aligned}\) \(\begin{aligned}{l}27.8\\27.1\\26.2\\26.8\\27.5\\29.5\\34.1\\32.9\end{aligned}\) \(\begin{aligned}{l}27.0\\20.5\\20.2\\23.7\\29.4\\30.0\\30.3\\36.3\end{aligned}\) \(\begin{aligned}{l}28.0\\31.3\\23.7\\24.9\\27.9\\35.6\\31.4\\25.5\end{aligned}\)

Carry out analysis of variance F test at significance level \(.01,\) and summarize the results in an ANOVA table.

Six samples of each of four types of cereal grain grown in a certain region were analyzed to determine thiamin content, resulting in the following data \((\mu g/g):\)

Wheat \(5.2\) \(4.5\) \(6.0\) \(6.1\) \(6.7\) \(5.8\)

Barley \(6.5\) \(8.0\) \(6.1\) \(7.5\) \(5.9\) \(5.6\)

Maize \(5.8\) \(4.7\) \(6.4\) \(4.9\) \(6.0\) \(5.2\)

Oats \(8.3\) \(6.1\) \(7.8\) \(7.0\) \(5.5\) \(7.2\)

Does this data suggest that at least two of the grains differ with respect to true average thiamin content? Use a level \(\alpha = .05\)

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.