/*! 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 9 Two different types of alloy, \(... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

Two different types of alloy, \(A\) and \(B\), have been used to manufacture experimental specimens of a small tension link to be used in a certain engineering application. The ultimate strength (ksi) of each specimen was determined, and the results are summarized in the accompanying frequency distribution. $$ \begin{array}{rrc} & \mathbf{A} & \mathbf{B} \\ \hline 26-<30 & 6 & 4 \\ 30-<34 & 12 & 9 \\ 34-<38 & 15 & 19 \\ 38-<42 & 7 & 10 \\ & m=40 & m=42 \\ \hline \end{array} $$ Compute a \(95 \%\) CI for the difference between the true proportions of all specimens of alloys \(\mathrm{A}\) and \(\mathrm{B}\) that have an ultimate strength of at least \(34 \mathrm{ksi}\).

Short Answer

Expert verified
95% CI for the difference is \([-0.3542, 0.0732]\).

Step by step solution

01

Determine the sample proportions

Calculate the sample proportions for alloys A and B that have an ultimate strength of at least 34 ksi. For alloy A, the number of specimens with at least 34 ksi is 15 (34-<38) + 7 (38-<42) = 22 out of a total of 40. Therefore, the sample proportion for A is \( \hat{p}_A = \frac{22}{40} = 0.55 \). For alloy B, 19 (34-<38) + 10 (38-<42) = 29 out of 42 specimens have at least 34 ksi. So the proportion for B is \( \hat{p}_B = \frac{29}{42} \approx 0.6905 \).
02

Calculate the difference in sample proportions

The difference in sample proportions is \( \hat{p}_A - \hat{p}_B = 0.55 - 0.6905 = -0.1405 \).
03

Estimate the standard error of the difference

The standard error (SE) for the difference of two proportions is calculated using the formula: \[ SE(\hat{p}_A - \hat{p}_B) = \sqrt{ \frac{\hat{p}_A(1 - \hat{p}_A)}{m_A} + \frac{\hat{p}_B(1 - \hat{p}_B)}{m_B} } \]Plugging in the numbers, \[SE(\hat{p}_A - \hat{p}_B) = \sqrt{ \frac{0.55 \times 0.45}{40} + \frac{0.6905 \times 0.3095}{42} } \approx 0.1091 \].
04

Compute the critical value for a 95% confidence interval

For a 95% confidence interval, the critical value from the standard normal distribution is approximately 1.96.
05

Calculate the confidence interval

Use the formula for the confidence interval: \[ \text{CI} = (\hat{p}_A - \hat{p}_B) \pm z \times SE(\hat{p}_A - \hat{p}_B) \]Substitute the known values: \[ \text{CI} = -0.1405 \pm 1.96 \times 0.1091 \]This results in \(-0.1405 \pm 0.2137\), so the confidence interval is \([-0.3542, 0.0732]\).

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.

Difference of Proportions
In statistics, a difference of proportions refers to the difference between two independent sample proportions.
In this exercise, we focus on alloy A and alloy B, which have different proportions of specimens with at least 34 ksi in strength.
For alloy A, the proportion is calculated as \( \hat{p}_A = \frac{22}{40} = 0.55 \), and for alloy B, it is \( \hat{p}_B = \frac{29}{42} \approx 0.6905 \).
The difference of proportions \((\hat{p}_A - \hat{p}_B)\) is calculated to understand how the strength distribution between the two alloys varies.
This difference is simply \( 0.55 - 0.6905 = -0.1405 \).
The negative difference suggests that a smaller proportion of alloy A specimens have at least 34 ksi compared to alloy B.
This calculation is fundamental in assessing whether this observed difference is likely due to random variation or a true difference.
Standard Error
The standard error (SE) of the difference between two proportions quantifies the variability of the difference observed in sample proportions.
It acts as a gauge of how precise our difference of proportions estimate is and helps construct the confidence interval.
The formula used is: \[ SE(\hat{p}_A - \hat{p}_B) = \sqrt{ \frac{\hat{p}_A(1 - \hat{p}_A)}{m_A} + \frac{\hat{p}_B(1 - \hat{p}_B)}{m_B} } \]This formula considers the sample sizes \(m_A = 40\) for alloy A and \(m_B = 42\) for alloy B.
By substituting the sample proportions, we have: \[ SE(\hat{p}_A - \hat{p}_B) \approx \sqrt{ \frac{0.55 \times 0.45}{40} + \frac{0.6905 \times 0.3095}{42} } \approx 0.1091 \]
A smaller SE means a more precise difference estimate, making the confidence interval narrower.
Critical Value
The critical value is a factor that determines the width of the confidence interval.
For a 95% confidence level, the critical value is typically 1.96 from the standard normal distribution (Z-distribution).
It indicates how many standard errors we need to go up and down from our estimated difference to capture the true difference with 95% confidence.
  • A higher critical value would create a wider confidence interval, implying more uncertainty.
  • Conversely, a lower critical value would lead to a narrower interval, suggesting more certainty about the estimate.
Using the critical value of 1.96 is standard practice for constructing confidence intervals when assuming normal distribution.
Frequency Distribution
Frequency distribution is a way of summarizing data that shows how often each different value occurs.
In this exercise, ultimate strength values for specimens made from alloys A and B are categorized into intervals.
  • From 26 to less than 30 ksi: 6 specimens for A, 4 for B.
  • 30 to less than 34 ksi: 12 specimens for A, 9 for B.
  • 34 to less than 38 ksi: 15 specimens for A, 19 for B.
  • 38 to less than 42 ksi: 7 specimens for A, 10 for B.
This distribution helps in calculating the sample proportions, as it breaks the data into manageable categories, making it easier to identify the number of specimens meeting a specific criterion, such as having at least 34 ksi in strength.
Understanding and interpreting these distributions are vital in statistical analysis, as they convey crucial insights about the data’s overall pattern.

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 "'The Effects of a Low-Fat, Plant-Based Dietary Intervention on Body Weight, Metabolism, and Insulin Sensitivity in Postmenopausal Women" (Amer. J. of Med., 2005: 991-997) reported on the results of an experiment in which half of the individuals in a group of 64 postmenopausal overweight women were randomly assigned to a particular vegan diet, and the other half received a diet based on National Cholesterol Education Program guidelines. The sample mean decrease in body weight for those on the vegan diet was \(5.8 \mathrm{~kg}\), and the sample SD was 3.2, whereas for those on the control diet, the sample mean weight loss and standard deviation were \(3.8\) and \(2.8\), respectively. Does it appear the true average weight loss for the vegan diet exceeds that for the control diet by more than \(1 \mathrm{~kg}\) ? Carry out an appropriate test of hypotheses at significance level \(.05\).

Teen Court is a juvenile diversion program designed to circumvent the formal processing of first-time juvenile offenders within the juvenile justice system. The article "An Experimental Evaluation of Teen Courts" \((J\). of Experimental Criminology, 2008: 137-163) reported on a study in which offenders were randomly assigned either to Teen Court or to the traditional Department of Juvenile Services method of processing. Of the \(56 \mathrm{TC}\) individuals, 18 subsequently recidivated (look it up!) during the 18 -month follow-up period, whereas 12 of the 51 DJS individuals did so. Does the data suggest that the true proportion of TC individuals who recidivate during the specified follow-up period differs from the proportion of DJS individuals who do so? State and test the relevant hypotheses using a significance level of . 10 .

Sometimes experiments involving success or failure responses are run in a paired or before/after manner. Suppose that before a major policy speech by a political candidate, \(n\) individuals are selected and asked whether \((S)\) or not \((F)\) they favor the candidate. Then after the speech the same \(n\) people are asked the same question. The responses can be entered in a table as follows: where \(x_{1}+x_{2}+x_{3}+x_{4}=n\). Let \(p_{1}, p_{2}, p_{3}\), and \(p_{4}\) denote the four cell probabilities, so that \(p_{1}=P(S\) before and \(S\) after), and so on. We wish to test the hypothesis that the true proportion of supporters \((S)\) after the speech has not increased against the alternative that it has increased. a. State the two hypotheses of interest in terms of \(p_{1}, p_{2}\), \(p_{3}\), and \(p_{4}\). b. Construct an estimator for the after/before difference in success probabilities. c. When \(n\) is large, it can be shown that the rv \(\left(X_{i}-X_{j}\right) / n\) has approximately a normal distribution with variance given by \(\left[p_{i}+p_{j}-\left(p_{i}-p_{j}\right)^{2}\right] / n\). Use this to construct a test statistic with approximately a standard normal distribution when \(H_{0}\) is true (the result is called McNemar's test). d. If \(x_{1}=350, x_{2}=150, x_{3}=200\), and \(x_{4}=300\), what do you conclude?

In an experiment to compare bearing strengths of pegs inserted in two different types of mounts, a sample of 14 observations on stress limit for red oak mounts resulted in a sample mean and sample standard deviation of \(8.48 \mathrm{MPa}\) and . \(79 \mathrm{MPa}\), respectively, whereas a sample of 12 observations when Douglas fir mounts were used gave a mean of \(9.36\) and a standard deviation of \(1.52\) ('Bearing Strength of White Oak Pegs in Red Oak and Douglas Fir Timbers," \(J\). of Testing and Evaluation, 1998, 109-114). Consider testing whether or not true average stress limits are identical for the two types of mounts. Compare df's and \(P\)-values for the unpooled and pooled \(t\) tests.

Suppose a level 05 test of \(H_{0}: \mu_{1}-\mu_{2}=0\) versus \(H_{\mathrm{a}}: \mu_{1}-\mu_{2}>0\) is to be performed, assuming \(\sigma_{1}=\sigma_{2}=\) 10 and normality of both distributions, using equal sample sizes \((m=n)\). Evaluate the probability of a type II error when \(\mu_{1}-\mu_{2}=1\) and \(n=25,100,2500\), and 10,000 . Can you think of real problems in which the difference \(\mu_{1}-\mu_{2}=1\) has little practical significance? Would sample sizes of \(n=10,000\) be desirable in such problems?

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.