/*! 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 1 The article "Physical Properties... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91影视

91影视

Log out

Learning Materials

Features

Discover

Chapter 13: Problem 1

The article "Physical Properties of Cumin Seed" \((J .\) of Agric. Engr. Res., 1996: 93-98) considered a quadratic regression of \(y=\) bulk density on \(x=\) moisture content. Data from a graph in the article follows, along with Minitab output from the quadratic fit. a. Does a scatterplot of the data appear consistent with the quadratic regression model? b. What proportion of observed variation in density can be attributed to the model relationship? c. Calculate a \(95 \%\) CI for true average density when moisture content is 13.7. d. The last line of output is from a request for estimation and prediction information when moisture content is 14 . Calculate a \(99 \%\) PI for density when moisture content is \(14 .\) e. Does the quadratic predictor appear to provide useful information? Test the appropriate hypotheses at significance level \(.05\).

Short Answer

Expert verified
a. Yes, if a parabolic trend is clear. b. R虏 from Minitab gives this. c. Compute using CI formula. d. Derive using PI formula. e. Perform F-test using p-value.

Step by step solution

01

Analyze Scatterplot

First, review the scatterplot of bulk density versus moisture content. Confirm if the data points form a parabolic shape, which is indicative of a quadratic trend.
02

Determine Proportion of Variation

Look at the R-squared (R虏) value from the Minitab output. This value represents the proportion of variance in bulk density that is explained by the model.
03

Calculate 95% Confidence Interval (CI) for Average Density

Use the prediction equation from the Minitab output to find the estimated density for 13.7 moisture content. Calculate the standard error (SE) of the estimate and use the t-distribution to find the 95% CI.
04

Derive 99% Prediction Interval (PI) for Density

Use the prediction output for 14 moisture content to find the estimated density and SE. Apply the t-distribution for a 99% PI, which accounts for the total variance including the error term.
05

Hypothesis Test of Quadratic Predictor's Usefulness

Perform an F-test using the ANOVA table from the output. The null hypothesis states that the quadratic term contributes no additional explanatory power; reject it if the p-value is less than 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!

Key Concepts

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

Scatterplot Analysis
When we analyze a scatterplot, we are looking for patterns to see how the independent variable (in this case, moisture content) affects the dependent variable (bulk density). This involves plotting the data points on a graph and observing their distribution.

For quadratic regression, the data should approximate a parabolic shape or curve. If the scatter points display a distinct arc, it suggests that a quadratic model is suitable to describe the relationship.

In this exercise, when bulk density data is plotted against moisture content, the points should curve if the regression model fits well. If they form a U-shape or an inverted U, it substantiates the quadratic model's application.
R-squared Value
The R-squared value, also denoted as R虏, helps us determine how well our model explains the variability of the response data around its mean. It ranges from 0 to 1 and is often expressed as a percentage.

The closer R虏 is to 1, the more our quadratic model explains the variation in bulk density based on moisture content. For instance, if R虏 is 0.85, this implies 85% of the variability in density is explained by the model.

Thus, in our context, the R-squared value is crucial for assessing the effectiveness of the quadratic regression model in capturing the observed variations in bulk density.
Confidence Interval
A confidence interval (CI) gives a range of values that is likely to contain the true average of the population parameter. In this exercise, we calculate a 95% CI for the average bulk density when moisture content is 13.7.

To do this, we use the predicted value of bulk density from our regression equation. The standard error of this prediction helps define the width of the CI. The t-distribution is then applied to estimate the interval.

If a 95% CI is between 0.9 and 1.1 g/cm鲁, it means we are 95% confident the true average density for 13.7 moisture content lies within this range. CIs are vital for understanding the precision and reliability of our predicted averages.
Prediction Interval
A prediction interval (PI) differs from a confidence interval in that it accounts for both the variation in the data and prediction error. In this exercise, we calculate a 99% PI for bulk density with a moisture content of 14.

This interval is typically wider than the CI because it needs to accommodate more uncertainty. While CI predicts where the average bulk density is expected, PI tells us the range for a single future density measurement.

If a 99% PI is between 0.85 and 1.15 g/cm鲁, we can be 99% certain that a new density measurement lies within this range with a moisture content of 14. PIs are essential when predicting individual outcomes rather than averages.

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 article "'Sensitivity Analysis of a \(2.5 \mathrm{~kW}\) Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell Stack by Statistical Method" (J. of Fuel Cell Sci. and Tech., 2009: 1-6) used regression analysis to investigate the relationship between fuel cell power (W) and the independent variables \(x_{1}=\mathrm{H}_{2}\) pressure (psi), \(x_{2}=\mathrm{H}_{2}\) flow (stoc), \(x_{3}=\) air pressure \(\left(\mathrm{psi}\right.\) ) and \(x_{4}=\) airflow (stoc). a. Here is Minitab output from fitting the model with the aforementioned independent variables as predictors (also fit by the authors of the cited article): a. Does there appear to be a useful relationship between power and at least one of the predictors? Carry out a formal test of hypotheses. b. Fitting the model with predictors \(x_{3}, x_{4}\), and the interaction \(x_{3} x_{4}\) gave \(R^{2}=.834\). Does this model appear to be useful? Can an \(F\) test be used to compare this model to the model of (a)? Explain. c. Fitting the model with predictors \(x_{1}-x_{4}\) as well as all second-order interactions gave \(R^{2}=.960\) (this model was also fit by the investigators). Does it appear that at least one of the interaction predictors provides useful information about power over and above what is provided by the first-order predictors? State and test the appropriate hypotheses using a significance level of \(.05\).

The article "'The Influence of Honing Process Parameters on Surface Quality, Productivity, Cutting Angle, and Coefficient of Friction" (Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, 2012: 77-83) included the following data on \(x_{1}=\) cutting speed \((\mathrm{m} / \mathrm{s}), x_{2}=\) specific pressure of pre-honing process \(\left(\mathrm{N} / \mathrm{mm}^{2}\right), x_{3}=\) specific pressure of finishing honing process, and \(y=\) productivity in the honing process ( \(\mathrm{mm}^{3} / \mathrm{s}\) for a particular tool; productivity is the volume of the material cut in a second.a. The article proposed a multivariate power model \(Y=\alpha x_{1}^{\beta_{1}} x x_{2}^{\beta_{2}} x_{3}^{\beta_{i}} \epsilon\). The implied linear regression model involves regressing \(\ln (y)\) against the three predictors \(\ln \left(x_{1}\right), \ln \left(x_{2}\right)\), and \(\ln \left(x_{3}\right)\). Partial Minitab output from fitting this latter model is as follows (the corresponding estimated power regression function appeared in the cited article). Carry out the model utility test at significance level \(.05\). b. The large \(P\)-value corresponding to the \(t\) ratio for \(\ln \left(x_{2}\right)\) suggests that this predictor can be eliminated from the model. Doing so and refitting yields the following Minitab output. c. Fit the simple linear regression model implied by your conclusion in (b) to the transformed data, and carry out a test of model utility. d. The standardized residuals from the fit referred to in (c) are .03,.33. \(1.69, .33,-.49, .96, .57, .33,-, 25\), \(-1.28, .29,-2.26\). Plot these against \(\ln \left(x_{1}\right)\). What does the pattern suggest? e. Fitting a quadratic regression model to relate \(\ln (y)\) to \(\ln \left(x_{1}\right)\) gave the following Minitab output. Carry out a test of model utility at significance level \(.05\) (the pattern in residual plots is satisfactory). Then use the fact that \(s_{\ln \left(\tilde{Y}^{\prime}\right)}=.0178\left[Y^{\prime}=\ln (Y)\right]\) when \(x_{1}=1\) to obtain a \(95 \%\) prediction interval for productivity.

The article "A Study of Factors Affecting the Human Cone Photoreceptor Density Measured by Adaptive Optics Scanning Laser Opthalmoscope" (Exptl. Eye Research, 2013: 1-9) included a summary of a multiple regression analysis based on a sample of \(n=192\) eyes; the dependent variable was cone cell packing density (cells/ \(\mathrm{mm}^{2}\) ), and the two independent variables were \(x_{1}=\) eccentricity \((\mathrm{mm})\) and \(x_{2}=\) axial length \((\mathrm{mm})\). a. The reported coefficient of multiple determination was \(.834\). Interpret this value, and carry out a test of model utility. b. The estimated regression function was \(y=\) \(35,821.792-6294.729 x_{1}-348.037 x_{2}\). Calculate a point prediction for packing density when eccentricity is \(1 \mathrm{~mm}\) and axial length is \(25 \mathrm{~mm}\). c. Interpret the coefficient on \(x_{1}\) in the estimated regression function in (b). d. The estimated standard error of \(\hat{\beta}_{1}\) was \(203.702\). Calculate and interpret a confidence interval with confidence level \(95 \%\) for \(\beta_{1}\). e. The estimated standard error of the estimated coefficient on axial length was \(134.350\). Test the null hypothesis \(H_{0}: \beta_{2}=0\) against the altemative \(H_{2}: \beta_{2} \neq 0\) using a significance level of 05 , and interpret the result.

Does exposure to air pollution result in decreased life expectancy? This question was examined in the article "Does Air Pollution Shorten Lives?" (Statistics and Public Policy, Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley, 1977). Data on $$ \begin{aligned} y &=\text { total mortality rate }(\text { deaths per } 10,000) \\ x_{1} &=\text { mean suspended particle reading }\left(\mu \mathrm{g} / \mathrm{m}^{3}\right) \\ x_{2} &=\text { smallest sulfate reading }\left(\left[\mu \mathrm{g} / \mathrm{m}^{3}\right] \times 10\right) \\ x_{3} &=\text { population density }\left(\text { people } / \mathrm{mi}^{2}\right) \\ x_{4} &=\text { (percent nonwhite) } \times 10 \\ x_{5} &=\text { (percent over } 65) \times 10 \end{aligned} $$ for the year 1960 was recorded for \(n=117\) randomly selected standard metropolitan statistical areas. The estimated regression equation was $$ \begin{aligned} y=& 19.607+.041 x_{1}+.071 x_{2} \\ &+.001 x_{3}+.041 x_{4}+.687 x_{5} \end{aligned} $$ a. For this model, \(R^{2}=.827\). Using a \(.05\) significance level, perform a model utility test. b. The estimated standard deviation of \(\hat{\beta}_{1}\) was 016 . Calculate and interpret a \(90 \%\) CI for \(\beta_{1}\). c. Given that the estimated standard deviation of \(\hat{\beta}_{4}\) is \(.007\), determine whether percent nonwhite is an important variable in the model. Use a .01 significance level. d. In 1960 , the values of \(x_{1}, x_{2}, x_{3}, x_{4}\), and \(x_{5}\) for Pittsburgh were \(166,60,788,68\), and 95 , respectively. Use the given regression equation to predict Pittsburgh's mortality rate. How does your prediction compare with the actual 1960 value of 103 deaths per 10,000 ?

Feature recognition from surface models of complicated parts is becoming increasingly important in the development of efficient computer-aided design (CAD) systems. The article 'A Computationally Efficient Approach to Feature Abstraction in DesignManufacturing Integration" (J. of Engr. for Industry, 1995: 16-27) contained a graph of \(\log _{\mathrm{s}}\) (total recognition time), with time in sec, versus \(\log _{10}\) (number of edges of a part), from which the following representative values were read: a. Does a scatterplot of \(\log\) (time) versus \(\log (\) edges) suggest an approximate linear relationship between these two variables? b. What probabilistic model for relating \(y=\) recognition time to \(x=\) number of edges is implied by the simple linear regression relationship between the transformed variables? c. Summary quantities calculated from the data are $$ \begin{aligned} &n=16 \quad \Sigma x_{i}^{\prime}=42.4 \quad \Sigma y_{i}^{\prime}=21.69 \\ &\Sigma\left(x_{i}^{\prime}\right)^{2}=126.34 \quad \Sigma\left(y_{i}^{\prime}\right)^{2}=38.5305 \\ &\Sigma x_{i}^{\prime} y_{i}^{\prime}=68.640 \end{aligned} $$ Calculate estimates of the parameters for the model in part (b), and then obtain a point prediction of time when the number of edges is 300 .
See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Math Textbooks

Probability and Statistics

Read Explanation

Logic and Functions

Read Explanation

Discrete Mathematics

Read Explanation

Statistics

Read Explanation

Mechanics Maths

Read Explanation

Geometry

Read Explanation
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.