/*! 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} Problem 7 Fusible interlinings are being u... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

Fusible interlinings are being used with increasing frequency to support outer fabrics and improve the shape and drape of various pieces of clothing. The article "Compatibility of Outer and Fusible Interlining Fabrics in Tailored Garments" (Textile Res. \(J_{.}, 1997: 137-142\) ) gave the accompanying data on extensibility (\%) at \(100 \mathrm{gm} / \mathrm{cm}\) for both high-quality (H) fabric and poor-quality (P) fabric specimens. \(\begin{array}{rrrrrrrrrr}\mathrm{H} & 1.2 & .9 & .7 & 1.0 & 1.7 & 1.7 & 1.1 & .9 & 1.7 \\ & 1.9 & 1.3 & 2.1 & 1.6 & 1.8 & 1.4 & 1.3 & 1.9 & 1.6 \\ & 8 & 2.0 & 1.7 & 1.6 & 2.3 & 2.0 & & & \\ \mathrm{P} & 1.6 & 1.5 & 1.1 & 2.1 & 1.5 & 1.3 & 1.0 & 2.6 & \end{array}\) a. Construct normal probability plots to verify the plausibility of both samples having been selected from normal population distributions. b. Construct a comparative boxplot. Does it suggest that there is a difference between true average extensibility for high-quality fabric specimens and that for poorquality specimens? c. The sample mean and standard deviation for the highquality sample are \(1.508\) and \(.444\), respectively, and those for the poor-quality sample are \(1.588\) and 530 . Use the two-sample \(t\) test to decide whether true average extensibility differs for the two types of fabric.

Short Answer

Expert verified
Normal probability plots can confirm normality; boxplots indicate visual differences. Conduct a two-sample t-test to check statistically for differences between fabric quality extensibility means.

Step by step solution

01

Check Normality Using Probability Plot for High-Quality Fabric

To verify if the high-quality fabric dataset can be considered to come from a normal distribution, construct a normal probability plot. Plot the extensibility data on the vertical axis against the normal score on the horizontal axis. If the points follow a straight line approximately, normality is a reasonable assumption.
02

Check Normality Using Probability Plot for Poor-Quality Fabric

Similarly, construct a normal probability plot for the poor-quality fabric dataset. As in Step 1, plot the extensibility data against normal scores, and check for linearity. A roughly linear pattern indicates the data may come from a normal distribution.
03

Construct Comparative Boxplot

Create a boxplot for each dataset (high-quality and poor-quality fabrics) side by side. These boxplots will provide visual comparisons of the medians, interquartile ranges, and potential outliers. Check for overlapping boxes and note any significant differences in the medians.
04

Conduct Two-Sample t-Test

To determine if there is a significant difference in the mean extensibility between high-quality and poor-quality fabrics, perform a two-sample t-test. Use the formula for the test statistic: \[ t = \frac{\bar{x}_1 - \bar{x}_2}{\sqrt{\frac{s_1^2}{n_1} + \frac{s_2^2}{n_2}}} \] where \(\bar{x}_1 = 1.508\), \(s_1 = 0.444\), \(n_1 = 20\) (assumed sample size inferred from context), \(\bar{x}_2 = 1.588\), \(s_2 = 0.530\), and \(n_2 = 9\). Calculate the degrees of freedom using the formula:\[ u = \frac{\left(\frac{s_1^2}{n_1} + \frac{s_2^2}{n_2}\right)^2}{\frac{\left(\frac{s_1^2}{n_1}\right)^2}{n_1-1} + \frac{\left(\frac{s_2^2}{n_2}\right)^2}{n_2-1}} \] Compare the calculated \(t\)-value with the critical value from the t-distribution table at a chosen significance level (e.g., 0.05). Analyze results to decide if there is enough evidence to conclude a difference.

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 91Ó°ÊÓ!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Understanding the Normal Probability Plot
The normal probability plot is a diagnostic tool used in statistics to assess whether a dataset is approximately normally distributed. To construct this plot, data values are plotted against the expected values that would be observed if the data follows a normal distribution. A key feature to look for in a normal probability plot is the linearity of the points.

If the points generally follow a straight line, this suggests that the data is normally distributed, making it a simple yet powerful visual check for the normality assumption.
  • For the high-quality fabric, you plot the extensibility percentage on the vertical axis and corresponding normal scores on the horizontal axis. A linear pattern would suggest that normality is plausible.
  • Similarly, this process is repeated for the poor-quality fabric.
    A clear alignment along a straight line for both datasets would indicate a normal distribution is a reasonable assumption.
Understanding whether the data comes from a normal distribution is vital before applying many statistical tests, as many tests require this assumption to be valid.
Insights from Comparative Boxplots
Comparative boxplots are graphical representations that showcase the distribution of a dataset. By comparing two boxplots side by side, such as those for high-quality and poor-quality fabrics, you can visually assess differences between the two datasets.

A boxplot includes several key components:
  • The median, or middle value, which is displayed as a line inside the box.
  • The interquartile range (IQR), which shows the range within which the central 50% of data lies.
  • Potential outliers, indicated by points outside the range of the whiskers of the box.

When comparing boxplots for the two fabric types, pay particular attention to the extent of overlap between the boxes. If the medians are significantly different and there is minimal overlap, this suggests a difference in central tendency between the groups. This visual insight provides an initial indication of whether the true average extensibilities for the two fabric types might differ significantly.
The Two-Sample T-Test Explained
The two-sample t-test is a statistical procedure used to determine if there is a significant difference between the means of two independent samples. In this scenario, it is used to compare the extensibility between high-quality and poor-quality fabrics.

The test involves the following steps:
  • Calculate the mean (\(ar{x}\)), standard deviation (\(s\)), and sample size (\(n\)) for each group.
  • Compute the test statistic using:\[ t = \frac{\bar{x}_1 - \bar{x}_2}{\sqrt{\frac{s_1^2}{n_1} + \frac{s_2^2}{n_2}}} \] where \(\bar{x}_1\) and \(\bar{x}_2\) are the sample means, \(s_1\) and \(s_2\) are the sample standard deviations, and \(n_1\) and \(n_2\) are the sample sizes.
  • The degrees of freedom (\(u\)) must be calculated using a formula that estimates the appropriate value based on the variability and size of the sample groups:
\[ u = \frac{(\frac{s_1^2}{n_1} + \frac{s_2^2}{n_2})^2}{(\frac{s_1^2}{n_1})^2/(n_1-1) + (\frac{s_2^2}{n_2})^2/(n_2-1)} \]

After computing the t-statistic and degrees of freedom, compare the calculated t-value to a critical value from the t-distribution table at your chosen significance level (e.g., 0.05). If the t-value is greater than the critical value, there is enough evidence to conclude a significant difference between the two means. This test is crucial for confirming whether any observed differences between the two fabric types' extensibility are statistically significant and not due to random chance.

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

The derailment of a freight train due to the catastrophic failure of a traction motor armature bearing provided the impetus for a study reported in the article "Locomotive Traction Motor Armature Bearing Life Study" (Lubrication Engr., Aug. 1997: 12-19). A sample of 17 high-mileage traction motors was selected, and the amount of cone penetration \((\mathrm{mm} / 10)\) was determined both for the pinion bearing and for the commutator armature bearing, resulting in the following data: \begin{tabular}{lccccccc} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{ Motor } \\ \cline { 2 - 7 } & \(\mathbf{1}\) & \(\mathbf{2}\) & \(\mathbf{3}\) & \(\mathbf{4}\) & \(\mathbf{5}\) & \(\mathbf{6}\) \\ Commutator & 211 & 273 & 305 & 258 & 270 & 209 \\ Pinion & 226 & 278 & 259 & 244 & 273 & 236 \\ & & & \multicolumn{5}{c}{ Motor } \\ & \multicolumn{7}{c}{\(\mathbf{9}\)} \\ \cline { 2 - 8 } & \(\mathbf{7}\) & \(\mathbf{8}\) & \(\mathbf{9}\) & \(\mathbf{1 1}\) & \(\mathbf{1 2}\) \\ Commutator & 223 & 288 & 296 & 233 & 262 & 291 \\ Pinion & 290 & 287 & 315 & 242 & 288 & 242 \end{tabular} \begin{tabular}{lccccc} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{ Motor } \\ \cline { 2 - 6 } & \(\mathbf{1 3}\) & \(\mathbf{1 4}\) & \(\mathbf{1 5}\) & \(\mathbf{1 6}\) & \(\mathbf{1 7}\) \\ Commutator & 278 & 275 & 210 & 272 & 264 \\ Pinion & 278 & 208 & 281 & 274 & 268 \end{tabular} Calculate an estimate of the population mean difference between penetration for the commutator armature bearing and penetration for the pinion bearing, and do so in a way that conveys information about the reliability and precision of the estimate. [Note: A normal probability plot validates the necessary normality assumption.] Would you say that the population mean difference has been precisely estimated? Does it look as though population mean penetration differs for the two types of bearings? Explain.

An experiment was performed to compare the fracture toughness of high-purity \(18 \mathrm{Ni}\) maraging steel with commercial-purity steel of the same type (Corrosion Science, 1971: 723-736). For \(m=32\) specimens, the sample average toughness was \(\bar{x}=65.6\) for the high-purity steel, whereas for \(n=38\) specimens of commercial steel \(\bar{y}=59.8\). Because the high-purity steel is more expensive, its use for a certain application can be justified only if its fracture toughness exceeds that of commercial-purity steel by more than 5 . Suppose that both toughness distributions are normal. a. Assuming that \(\sigma_{1}=1.2\) and \(\sigma_{2}=1.1\), test the relevant hypotheses using \(\alpha=.001\). b. Compute \(\beta\) for the test conducted in part (a) when \(\mu_{1}-\mu_{2}=6\)

Researchers sent 5000 resumes in response to job ads that appeared in the Boston Globe and Chicago Tribune. The resumes were identical except that 2500 of them had "white sounding" first names, such as Brett and Emily, whereas the other 2500 had "black sounding" names such as Tamika and Rasheed. The resumes of the first type elicited 250 responses and the resumes of the second type only 167 responses (these numbers are very consistent with information that appeared in a Jan. 15, 2003, report by the Associated Press). Does this data strongly suggest that a resume with a "black" name is less likely to result in a response than is a resume with a "white" name?

Arsenic is a known carcinogen and poison. The standard laboratory procedures for measuring arsenic concentration \((\mu \mathrm{g} / \mathrm{L})\) in water are expensive. Consider the accompanying summary data and Minitab output for comparing a laboratory method to a new relatively quick and inexpensive field method (from the article "Evaluation of a New Field Measurement Method for Arsenic in Drinking Water Samples," J. of Envir. Engr, 2008: 382-388). Two-Sample T-Test and CI \(\begin{array}{lcccr}\text { Sample } & \text { N } & \text { Mean } & \text { StDev } & \text { SE Mean } \\ 1 & 3 & 19.70 & 1.10 & 0.64 \\ 2 & 3 & 10.90 & 0.60 & 0.35 \\ \text { Estimate for difference: } 8.800 & \end{array}\) 95? CI for difference: \((6.498,11.102)\) T-Test of difference \(=0\) (vs not \(=\) ): \(\mathrm{T}\)-Value \(=12.16 \mathrm{P}\)-Value \(=0.001 \mathrm{DF}=3\) What conclusion do you draw about the two methods, and why? Interpret the given confidence interval. [Note: One of the article's authors indicated in private communication that they were unsure why the two methods disagreed.]

Olestra is a fat substitute approved by the FDA for use in snack foods. Because there have been anecdotal reports of gastrointestinal problems associated with olestra consumption, a randomized, double-blind, placebo- controlled experiment was carried out to compare olestra potato chips to regular potato chips with respect to Gl symptoms ("Gastrointestinal Symptoms Following Consumption of Olestra or Regular Triglyceride Potato Chips, J. of the Amer. Med. Assoc., 1998: 150-152). Among 529 individuals in the TG control group, 17.6\% experienced an adverse GI event, whereas among the 563 individuals in the olestra treatment group, \(15.8 \%\) experienced such an event. a. Carry out a test of hypotheses at the \(5 \%\) significance level to decide whether the incidence rate of GI problems for those who consume olestra chips according to the experimental regimen differs from the incidence rate for the TG control treatment. b. If the true percentages for the two treatments were \(15 \%\) and \(20 \%\), respectively, what sample sizes \((m=n)\) would be necessary to detect such a difference with probability \(90 ?\)

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.